Theodicy and Suffering

History of the Devil page1 of 13 Kellogg

HIST 799, Queens CollegeThe History of the DevilProfessor Sarah CovingtonFall 2009

Riley [email protected]

646-413-3749

Suffering, Theodicy, and the Devil in Job, Anthony, and Luther

The theme of suffering is a strong line throughout the story of Job, the life of Saint Anthony,

and the writings of Martin Luther. What role does the devil play in each of these? What, if any, is the

theodicy put forward in them? How do these issues fit into the larger picture presented by each of

these narratives of man’s life in relation to God and the devil? And, finally, how do these positions fit

into the fabric of their times?

The devil presents himself to these three men in different ways, employing trial, temptation, and

torment in varying degrees for each of them.

• In Job we do not see the devil directly tempting the subject to evil action; he does not appear to Job

at all. The temptation and inducement to sin is solely through the imposing of suffering, and the sin

to which he is tempted is solely that of blasphemy or infidelity. Further, in this story, unlike the

others considered here, Satan acts under God’s explicit orders.

• In the story of the Life of Saint Anthony, Satan appears to him in various guises, tempting him to

sin through various means. The temptations are to sinful acts, but more to spiritual weakness, doubt,

and despair.

• The devil was very real to Luther, and harassed him in many petty ways, annoying and distracting

him, attempting to frighten him and derail him from his spiritual path. But the sin with which Luther

was most concerned with was that of spiritual error, Satan’s ability to draw one into wrong thinking

on spiritual matters, on both the individual level and the institutional.

Despite the differences in their lives, their circumstances, and their eras, Anthony and Luther have

more in common with one another in their perceived relationship to Satan than they do with Job, in

that they are Christians and thus share the conviction that Christ has assured the final victory of good

over the forces of evil. Satan attacks the individual and battles hard against him, and the ultimate

victory of his one’s own soul in eternity may be beyond one’s own power to determine, but there is

hope of salvation in eternity because of the incarnation. Elaine Pagels writes, “The faith that Christ

has conquered Satan assures Christians that in their own struggles the stakes are eternal, and victory

mailto:[email protected]


is certain. Those who participate in this cosmic drama cannot lose.”1 Job, and the contemporary

Jewish readers of the book about him, had no such assurance.

Job

The book of Job was written c. 550 B.C.E. Though it was likely a much older story handed down

through generations (Pagels refers to it as a “folk tale”2), the form the story takes when recorded fixes

it in the context of the historical perspectives and concerns of the times. On the plane of human

history, Elaine Pagels provides a linguistic and historical context for the presentation of Satan here.

When first seen in the story, Satan has been “prowling about on earth … roaming around there”3. The

Hebrew word satan, “opposer”, or “adversary”, sounds similar to the Hebrew shût, meaning “to

roam”. This suggestion of a “roaming adversary” would have sounded to contemporary readers very

much “like those whom many Jews of the time would have known—and detested— from the king of

Persia’s elaborate system of secret police and intelligence officers. Known as ‘the king’s eye’ or ‘the

king’s ear’, these agents roamed the empire looking for signs of disloyalty among the people.” 4

Though the character of Satan in the book of Job is clearly superhuman in nature and the story

religious and instructional in the intent, this satan has a parallel in the worldly lives of the reader. In

addition, not long before the story was written, in 586 B.C.E., the Jewish Temple was destroyed by

Nebuchadnezzar, and the Babylonian exile began. Profound questions must have arisen from this

experience: if we, the Jews, are the chosen people of God, why would he bring such suffering on us?

This question is at the center of the book of Job, and is felt through much of the Old Testament. God

does not act strictly for man’s benefit, at least not in a way accessible to man’s understanding. The

main lesson of Job seems to be that faith must persist, even when understanding fails.

The God of Jewish understanding at this time was a fully monotheistic God; God was harsh,

with his chosen people as well as with their enemies. The radical dualism of Zoroaster had been

rejected, as had dualistic monism; but as all-powerful, God paradoxically contained within himself

the responsibility for evil as well as for good. When someone transgressed against His laws, He was

responsible for the law, the transgression, and the punishment. Satan was not a fully-formed concept,

and was not at all the personification of evil, nor its supreme principle or source. He was sometimes

counted among the “sons of God”, and sometimes as a “messenger of God”, and did God’s bidding.

1 Pagels, Elaine. The Origin of Satan. New York: Random House, 1995.p. 1812 Pagels, p. 423 Job 1:74 Pagels, pp. 41-42


He was the “opponent”, or “accuser”. In scriptural passages written earlier, “satan” was used as a

common rather than a proper, noun—an angel was “a satan” when he was opposing someone. The

book of Job is where we first encounter a character for whom that word is used as a name.

In Job, Satan is not the foe of God or of God’s creation, man. He is one among God’s servants,

or sons, and does God’s bidding. He appears only at the start of the story, setting the action in

motion. Job is blameless; the perfect example of God’s human creation.5 Satan suggests that God test

Job’s faith, but takes no action against him before God agrees. In fact, the text is not clear whether it

is Satan acting on God’s orders, or God himself, who visits the plaguing punishments on Job. But in

either case, Satan does not act on his own. Once the stage has thus been set, the story addresses the

question of theodicy, rather than the devil per se.

Job’s friends speak with him, each arguing the causes and implications of his position. Job

replies, and also addresses God directly, challenging Him to justify His actions.

El’iphaz tells him that he, Job, must have sinned whether or not he believes this is so, since God

does not inflict suffering on the innocent. El’iphaz poses the central question of the text explicitly:

“Can mortal man be righteous before God?”6 … “do they not die, and that without wisdom?”7 …

“Happy is the man whom God reproves … .”8 In other words, all men are sinful in God’s sight; we

die without understanding the nature of our sufferings or our wrongs; and we should be glad to

receive God’s punishment, since we deserve it and it will serve God’s good plan at the end of time.

Bildad also contends that God is just and will punish only the wicked, and will reward Job if he is

indeed blameless. Zophar says, “But oh, that God would speak…and that he would tell you the

secrets of his wisdom!…Know then that God exacts of you less than your guilt deserves.”

5 It is worth noting that in this text there is no hint of the existence of anything corresponding to the concept of original Sin; no limitation is placed on the righteousness and blamelessness of Job in God’s description of him to Satan in the prologue. The fall, in Judaism, did not lead to inherent sin in man, and did not weigh against the individual in God’s judgment of him. Another omission worth noting is that Job’s livestock, servants, and children are all killed, yet there is no reference at all to the harm or suffering of anyone other than Job. The servants and children could be thought of as doubly undeserving of this fate, since their deaths were brought about not only irrespective of whether they themselves were innocent or sinners, but for the sake of God’s relationship with someone else. This is a further cause to question the justice of God’s actions, yet even Job, when he asks the reason for his suffering, makes no reference to the suffering and deaths of the other people. 6 Job 4:177 Job 4:218 Job 5:17


Job answers each time that he believes himself innocent, and unjustly punished; but he

steadfastly refuses to renounce his faith. He says that “the arrows of the Almighty are in me…the

terrors of God are arrayed against me”9, and wishes “that it would please God to crush me” “for I

have not denied the words of the Holy One.”10 Job answers, in chapter 9, that he also believes in the

justice of God. But he then says

He crushes me with a tempest,and multiplies my wounds without cause.…If it is a contest of strength, behold him! If it is a matter of justice, who can summon him? Though I am innocent, my own mouth would condemn me; though I am blameless, he would prove me perverse.… It is all one; therefore I say,he destroys both the blameless and the wicked.… he mocks at the calamity of the innocent.The earth is given into the hand of the wicked;… if it is not he, who then is it?11

One cannot fight God; no one has the strength. To whom would one appeal for justice when

God is the one complained against? And even if there were an authority higher than God to whom

one could appeal, God would turn one’s words against oneself. Job is certain of his innocence.

Therefore, he must conclude that God metes out punishment to men indiscriminately as regards their

righteousness, and mocks the suffering of the innocent. None but God has the power to inflict this

undeserved suffering. Therefore none but God is responsible for evil.

Job’s response (chapters 12–13) to his friends is that they are not telling him anything he did not

already know; all men know the things they are saying.

What you know, I also know; I am not inferior to you. But I would speak with the Almighty, and I desire to argue my case with God. …Let me have silence, and I will speak, and let come on me what may….Behold, he will slay me; I have no hope; yet I will defend my ways to his face. This will be my salvation, that a godless man shall not come before him.

9 Job 6:410 Job 6:9–1011 Job 9:17–24


He addresses God directly, and asks him to justify his actions. Let God show him where he has

erred: “Teach me, and I will be silent.”12 His terms are provocative, asking God why He hides His

face; why he will not openly tell Job why he deserves to be so badly treated. In 10:1 et. seq. Job

challenges God: “Is it right for you to attack me, in contempt for what you yourself have made, thus

abetting the schemes of the wicked?” this is precisely what God has done: He knows Job is innocent,

and even if he were not, Job says, God himself, as creator of man’s being, is author of his life and

therefore responsible for the contents of that life.

Anthony

Anthony lived in Egypt c. 250–355 C.E., as did his biographer, Athanasius, c. 293–373. The

attitudes and perspectives attributed to Anthony may have been those of Athanasius as much as of

Anthony himself, and the episodes described may have been embellished by either of these two, or

by intermediate storytellers. However, the two men being essentially contemporaries, the historical

context of the ideas and their place in the development of Christian thought is the same regardless. At

this time, there was little precedent for the solitary life of devotion Anthony chose. But there were

scattered ascetic practitioners whom Anthony sought out as mentors, learning from each as much as

he could. At this time, the devil was frequently viewed as tempting Christians to renounce their faith

since devotion could be difficult, and profession of faith could even be fatal, under the persecution

that was prevalent in some places. During Anthony’s lifetime, state-sanctioned persecution of

Christians ranged from heavier taxation to imprisonment or even execution. The predominant view

of the devil was as an opponent of the individual’s true, Christian spiritual path. The devil’s motive

for action in this story (and generally at this time), is always that he is envious of man having the

hope of salvation when he himself has no such hope. He hates the thought of man’s being raised up

to abide in heaven for eternity, when he has, through his own choice, fallen from that place and lost

the prospect of ever returning.

Anthony gave up the affluent life he had inherited and took up the monastic life, going into the

desert in emulation of Christ, living alone and devoting himself to prayer and spiritual development.

The desert was also the reputed haunt of the devil and demons, making it an ideal place to go to do

spiritual battle.13 The devil appeared to him in several ways, and each time Anthony countered them

12 Job 6:2413 In modern, psychological terms, the solitude of the desert or other wilderness is conducive to the deep contemplation and reflection that bring out our inner demons.


with “faith, prayers, and fasting”14, “passed through the temptation unscathed.”15 The devil escalated

his attacks each time when the previous attempt had been unsuccessful in deterring Anthony from his

path. The first onslaught was the insinuation of doubt in his thoughts regarding the choice to devote

his life to God, “speaking through his inner thoughts and impulses, through imagination and

desire”16: thoughts of his family obligations, of how much easier life would be if he went back to his

ancestral lands, how he could do more good for the needy if he had money, and finally what hard

work it was to lead the pious life he had set out upon. “In a word he raised in his mind a great dust of

debate, wishing to debar him from his settled purpose.”17 Next, the devil instilled lustful thoughts and

feelings in the saint, and appeared in the shape of a woman attempting to seduce Anthony. He then

appeared in the form of a black child, “taking a visible shape in accordance with the colour of his

mind”. He identified himself as the “friend of whoredom”, and boasted of his success in corrupting

others. Anthony replied to him, “Thou art very despicable then, for thou art black-hearted and weak

as a child. Henceforth I shall have no trouble from thee for the Lord is my helper, and I shall look

down on mine enemies.” This drives the devil away in shame at his failure. Anthony then moved into

a tomb outside of the village. One night, the devil “with a multitude of demons” comes into the tomb

and beats Anthony severely. Anthony prays, and shouts to the devil in defiance that he is not afraid.

The devil and many demons come that night in the form of beasts—lions, bears, wolves, scorpions,

insects, etc. They attempt to frighten Anthony, but he mocks them, saying that if they really had any

power, it would have been enough for one of them to come; and that it is a sign of their weakness

that they needed to come in the form of animals, rather than their own forms. At that point, the roof

of the tomb appeared to open, and a light came in which was a sign of God. The demons vanished,

and the pain from the beating left him. Anthony asked God why He did not intervene sooner to

prevent or remove his pain. God answered that He wanted to wait, to see how Anthony would fight;

He sees that Anthony has proved himself, and promises to watch over him from then on.18 Next, the

devil places silver and gold in Anthony’s path as he is making his way through the desert to the

mountains. Anthony recognizes this for the trick that it is, and it vanishes. He finds a ruined fort,

where he lives for twenty years, his friends and admirers bringing him food periodically. During this

period, those who visit him sometimes hear several voices arguing. Anthony tells them that these

14 ibid.15 ibid.16 Pagels, p. 17317 Athanasius: Select Works and Letters, Volume IV of Nicene And Post-Nicene Fathers, Series II, Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, editors, pp. 196-19718 Like Job, Anthony questions God. Unlike Job, he is completely satisfied with God’s answer.


were demons, and that the friends must pay no attention, but be aware that their faith in Christ has

more power than the demons.

When he comes out of his solitary seclusion, Anthony preaches to his followers about demons:

“concerning their nature … much could be said, but … at this time it is pressing and necessary for us

only to know their wiles against ourselves”. We must learn to recognize them when they come. But

as fearsome as the devil and his demons are, their strength is, to the faithful, nothing compared to the

strength of faith in Christ. He reminds his followers that in the story of Job, Satan could take no action

to bring him harm until God granted him permission; the devil “was bound by the Lord as a sparrow,

that we should mock him. … Let us then heed not his words, for he is a liar: and let us not fear his

visions, seeing that they themselves are deceptive.”19. He is merely a deceiver, and weak as well.

So we should remember that only God is to be feared, and the devil and his demons merely

despised. The harm that the devil can do to us is only through his power to deceive us and thus make

us despair; the real danger comes through the power of our minds, if they are weak enough to be

deceived: we ourselves cause our own downfall. Pagels puts this in a modern phrasing: Anthony

“taught his spiritual heirs … to picture Satan as the most intimate enemy of all—the enemy we call

our own self”. 20

Luther

The devil was at the height of his strength in the minds and lives of the faithful during the

Reformation. Cities, urban life, and commerce were on the rise in the late fifteenth and early

sixteenth centuries. With the advent of the printing press had come a surge in literacy which allowed

many of the laity to read—and interpret—scripture for themselves. There was an increase in the cash

economy, and more emphasis on secular power than in the past. Luther’s Reformation encouraged

the introspective, solitary individual in his spiritual quest. The Protestants rejected the traditional and

communal protections and defenses against Satan: the confessional and exorcism. Although most

people still belonged to a church, and had their pastor and community for spiritual support, more than

in the past the individual was, or felt, alone in his battle with the devil. Pagels eloquently describes

the context:

“No … angels armed with the sword of glory protected you now; you were … solitary with your bible, fearfully pondering your sins, exposed to evil’s winter winds. No

19 Athanasius p 201–20220 Pagels, p. 173


wonder that the literary heroes of the age were Faust alone at the midnight crossroads with Mephistopheles, and Macbeth alone on the blasted heath with the three witches.”21

Isolation leads to an overblown fear of overblown evils. Ask any child afraid of the monster

hiding under his bed. This may help to explain why the Protestants, though eagerly dispensing with

almost anything not clearly rooted in scripture, held fast to and even expanded on the medieval

beliefs about witches.

Russell writes of Lactantius’s view that good and evil can only be defined in relation to one

another; evil must logically exist for good to exist. Not only for their intrinsic existence, though, is

the one necessary to the other, but also for man’s comprehension of them. “I tell you in short that

God wishes it to be so. … to exclude evil is to eliminate virtue.”22 Further, evil must have real power

for good to have real meaning. This is, as Russell points out, foundational to Luther’s doctrine of the

two wills of God: “evil must exist in God’s overall plan, but God also hates it and wishes us to fight

with him against it.”

“From the mystics Luther drew the notion of God as a coincidence of opposites. God is wrath,

and God is love. God is repudiation, and God is faith. … God wills wickedness and God hates the

wicked. … this apparently double will is actually one united will that we cannot understand.” “While

the Devil and God may will the same thing, their purpose is never the same. The devil is God’s tool,

like a pruning hook or a hoe that God uses to cultivate his garden.” This accords with the role of

Satan in Job: that of a faithful servant, bringing evil to humanity at God’s command. In Luther’s

view, the Devil takes pleasure in the suffering he causes, but he can not cause any suffering that God

does not will him to. God takes pleasure in the larger good that grows out of that suffering. Luther

also believed that the Devil tormented one more the more faithful one became. This is again in

accord with Job. However, for Luther, it was faith specifically in Christ, not only in the God of the

Old Testament, that provoked the Devil to torment and tempt man. 23 Here, Luther’s philosophy also

follows that of Anthony.

Because of this view that all of created reality was a moral battleground with the most profound

stakes, Luther could not see any religious difference as one of simple disagreement; differing views

were necessarily evil and from the Devil. He “denounced as ‘agents of Satan’ all Christians who

21 Russell, Jeffrey Burton. The Prince of Darkness. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1988.p. 168.22 Russell, p. 82-8323 Russell, p. 171.


remained loyal to the Roman Catholic church, all Jews who refused to acknowledge Jesus as

messiah, all who challenged the power of the landowning aristocrats by participating in the Peasants’

War, and all ‘protestant’ Christians who were not Lutheran.” 24 “Luther…would come to see his

former fellow Christians—Roman Catholics—as the ‘Pharisees and scribes’ against whom Jesus

warned his disciples. … some dissenting Christians since the second century have claimed that the

gospel itself has been co-opted by the forces of evil.”25

In the personal battle against the Devil, one had only to remember that Christ had won that war

to believe one was secure in one’s own victory. “Our every defense against Satan rests upon the

power of Jesus Christ. … Luther also used more direct means of defense, such as cheerfulness,

laughter, boisterousness, bawdiness, scorn, insults, and obscenity. Everything active, assertive,

earthy, and good humored fends off the depression on which the Prince of Darkness thrives. One of

Luther’s best defenses was to go to bed with Katie[his wife].”26 This presents is a sharp contrast to

the Gnostic idea, echoed in much Protestantism, of the inherently evil nature of the physical world,

and the necessity of suppressing it in favor of exclusive cultivation of the spiritual.

The lyrics of “A Mighty Fortress Is Our God”, Luther’s famous hymn, include the lines:

A mighty fortress is our godA good weapon and defense …The old, evil enemyIs determined to get us; …However fierce he claims to be, …One little word can fell him

Similarly, Anthony referred frequently to the devil being vanquished by simply the mention of

Christ’s name.

Conclusions

The three texts considered here seem to agree that God is the source and cause of evil in the

world, but that although responsible for evil, He is not morally blameworthy. Taken together, they

can argue that evil is necessary for two reasons:

First, human moral good cannot exist without human free will. The inevitable outcome of free

will is that some will will be for good and some for evil.

24 Pagels, p. 18025 Pagels, p. 15826 Russell, p. 173.


Second, if all divine response to human action were just—i.e., reward for good, suffering and

punishment for evil—then man would do good with the certainty of reward. This then, would not be

really good. God wishes to allow man the opportunity of choosing to be truly good for the sake of

goodness, or for the sake of love of God. Thus there must be gratuitous, unearned suffering inflicted

even on the good, and gratuitous, unearned reward given to the evil. This is the explanation of Job’s

suffering, and of Luther’s philosophy that salvation is received by grace alone, and not by works.

This leads to the view that Satan’s acts against man are all a part of God’s plan for the creation,

and for the eventual salvation of mankind. The individual may not be saved at the end of time, but

the suffering of men—both earned and gratuitous—is necessary to the eventual salvation of any.


Addendum: Iconography

Considerations of length prevent a thorough discussion of the artistic treatments of the subjects

of this paper. However, I will briefly address how some visual artists have addressed the Temptation

of Saint Anthony. Visual works range from 10th century Italian frescoes through Hieronymus Bosch’s

famous triptych, Breugel, Michelangelo, to Max Ernst and Salador Dali—even tattoos27. The

changing social and political settings in which these works were created influenced both the artistic

styles and the interpretations and emphases of the theology.28

Bosch produced several paintings on the subject, all around 1550 C.E. The triptych is the best

known of these works. The iconography is incredibly dense, and much of it is difficult to interpret.

Throughout the painting can be seen the fantastical, grotesque, and disturbing creatures and situations

for which Bosch is known. There are many depictions of physical suffering, implements of torture,

bodies or dismembered parts of bodies, crippled, caged and otherwise bound or entrapped, pierced

with swords, etc. It includes a depiction of a Black Mass, with a baby apparently being served on a

platter to a bishop. There are a few naked bodies; the woman in the right-hand panel may be intended

to represent the body in which the devil came to tempt Anthony in the desert. Other fantastic

creatures, hybrids or mutants, abound. The worldview here shows the influence of persecutions,

torture, belief in black magic; the uncertainty and insecurity of the world as influenced by the

“discovery” of the New World, the beginnings of doubt about the eternal certainties such as the earth

being the center of the universe. Other artists, roughly contemporary with Bosch, are similarly filled

with fantastic and gruesome images of suffering and ghastly creatures. They include many figures

and scenes mentioned in Athanasius’s Life of Anthony. These include Breugel the elder, Lucas

Cranach, (1506), Grünewald (1515),29 Lucas Van Leyden (c. 1530), Jan Mandijn (c. 1550) The

overall effect of most of these is not so much an image of temptation as of the decay and corruption

of the fleshly world, and of nightmare-like horrors attempting to annihilate the saint.

Callot’s 1635 etching is dominated by a huge dragon at the top center representing the devil.

One of the dragon’s feet is bound by a chain, but loosely enough for him to be orchestrating the

27 http://hubpages.com/hub/Tattoo-Ideas-Famous-Works-of-Art28 The Bucerius Kunst Forum in Hamburg, Germany, presented an extensive exhibition on works on this subject in 2008, titled “Terror and Desire; The Temptation of St. Anthony from Hieronymus Bosch to Max Ernst”. See http://www.buceriuskunstforum.de/h/index.php?id=129 for representative pieces and brief commentary.29 This painting, in its execution, if not in its contents, looks disconcertingly like a scary illustration for a modern children’s book.

http://www.buceriuskunstforum.de/h/index.php?id=129


action of the smaller players, the many demons surrounding the saint. The scene has shifted here to

be not so much a depiction of the testing and triumph of Saint Anthony as a use of that story as a

vehicle to illustrate the Revelation story of Satan having dominion over the earth, though bound and

thus ultimately doomed to fail in the final reckoning.

By the nineteenth century, for example in a painting by Jacques-Antoine Vallin c. 1800, many

depictions ignored the horrifying episodes of demons in animal form, and concentrated on the sexual

temptation: beautiful, partly nude young women pull the saint by a rope, or lie next to him as he

studiously avoids their gazes, or hover around him as misty apparitions. By this time, belief in the

devil had changed. Those who did still believe in the reality of the devil were unlikely to believe in

his power to take physical form in the shape of a monster; it was far more believable that the lust in

his own mind was the sin plaguing Anthony than that the devil had literally taken human form. The

psychological approach to sin had become dominant.


Works cited:

Doniger, Wendy. Splitting the Difference. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.

Pagels, Elaine. The Origin of Satan. New York: Random House, 1995.

Russell, Jeffrey Burton. The Prince of Darkness. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1988.

New Jerusalem Bible. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1985.

Athanasius: Select Works and Letters, Volume IV of Nicene And Post-Nicene Fathers, Series II, Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, editors.

Oberman, Heiko A. Luther Against the Devil. Christian Century, January 24, 1990, pp. 75-79. Excerpted from Luther: Man Between God and the Devil, Yale University Press 1990.

Theodicy and Suffering

Documents

Transcript of Theodicy and Suffering