Day Three: A Great Red Dragon

A Dozen Days of Dragons

Begin reading this series at Day One: An Apocalyptic Christmas Story

Or, read Day Two: A Great Sign in Heaven

Yes, there are dragons in the Bible.

Immediately after the prophet Isaiah laments the suffering of the people of Judah, a nation writhing in pain as a woman suffering the agony of child birth, he reassures them the wrath will pass. The Lord will act, and those who dwell in the dust shall awake and sing for joy. Then, Isaiah promises in the next breath,

On that day the LORD with his cruel and great and strong sword will punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent, Leviathan the twisting serpent, and he will kill the dragon that is in the sea.

Isaiah 27:1

Amidst the travails of childbirth, says Isaiah, lurks the fleeing serpent, the twisting serpent coiled to strike, that represents the enemy of Judah. Leviathan, the dragon that is in the sea, actually appears several times in the Hebrew scriptures. In another passage, Isaiah recalls God’s deliverance of his people from Egypt by asking God, “Was it not You who cut Rahab to pieces, who pierced the dragon?” (Isaiah 51:9).

To clarify, “Rahab” in this verse is an entirely different Hebrew word, even pronounced differently, from the name of the Canaanite woman who protected the Hebrew spies in the Old Testament story of Jericho’s fall. It’s not actually a name at all, and is not capitalized in the original Hebrew text. This ancient Hebrew word would be better translated into English as “the insolent one” or “the arrogant one.” Medieval translators erred by capitalizing the word as if it were a name, and we’ve been stuck with their translation mistake ever since.

The word is used again in Job 26:12–13: “By his power he stilled the sea; by his understanding he struck down Rahab. By his wind the heavens were made fair; his hand pierced the fleeing serpent.”

The psalmist, like Isaiah, uses Leviathan the dragon to represent Israel’s enemy, in this case, Egypt. “You divided the sea by your might; you broke the heads of the dragons in the waters. You crushed the heads of Leviathan.” (Psalm 74:13–14)

So there’s a pattern in scripture of using Leviathan, the dragon, to represent the enemy of God’s people, the pagan nations that opposed Israel and Judah. When foreign armies invaded, they were dragons emerging from the raging sea. When God delivered the nation from its enemies, proclaim psalmist and prophet, it was like cutting off the head of the dragon.

In his revelation, John the Seer echoes the pattern of Isaiah by placing the dragon lurking in the birthing chamber. Now John beholds two signs in the heavens … following hard after the great sign of the woman in childbirth, comes …

… a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads.

Revelation 12:3

There’s a specific reason John describes the dragon as having crowns on each of its seven heads, and 10 horns. We’ll get to that discussion later. But first, what are we to make of this great red dragon?

John tells us later in chapter twelve that the great dragon is “that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world.” (Revelation 12:9)

Remember that the scriptures are translated into English from several ancient languages, primarily Hebrew and Greek. Those languages don’t have uppercase letters, so anytime you read a verse like Revelation 12:9 that includes a capitalized word like “Satan,” those words were not capitalized in the original manuscripts. Translators are making an interpretive decision here, bowing to church tradition, by treating “Satan” as a proper name.

This is called a transliteration — carrying over the foreign language word rather than translating into its English equivalent, thus leaving the word untranslated. A transliteration doesn’t tell you the meaning of the words, but it helps you pronounce them. For example, an Arabic language word is transliterated as “Allah” because that is what the word sounds like when spoken in that language. An actual translation of the meaning of that word from Arabic to English language, however, would be “God.”

In the original language of the ancient Hebrew text, “Satan” was not written as a name, or even a proper noun. Rather, “ha satan” is Hebrew for “the adversary.” Whenever the word “Satan” appears in scripture, a transliteration would be “the satan” (lowercase), or even better, the translation would be “the adversary.” Which perfectly fits the imagery of the dragon for Israel’s enemies.

Just as translators chose to render “the arrogant one” with the name, “Rahab,” so they chose to render “the adversary” with the name, “Satan.” It’s the same translation error, cemented in tradition.

Likewise, “devil” is translated from the Greek word “diablos” — “accuser” or “slanderer.” That’s where the English word “diabolical” comes from, but it’s not a proper name.

There is no personage, or being, in scripture who is named “Satan.” Rather, there is a symbolic figure that in the Hebrew language is referred to as “ha satan,” in the Greek language as “diablos,” in the English language as “the adversary” or “the accuser.” John the Seer, like prophet and poet before him, uses the imagery of a dragon to depict the satan, the devil, the adversary of God’s people.

This seems to be the way Jesus thought of the satan. After Peter declares that Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16), Jesus proclaims that God revealed this truth to Peter and promises him the keys of the kingdom of heaven. But when Jesus begins talking about suffering and dying at the hands of the religious authorities, Peter insists, “This must never happen to you!”

To which Jesus abruptly rebukes him, “Get behind me, Satan!”

I don’t think Jesus means that Peter, his devoted disciple whom he just praised, is literally the devil. I think Jesus means that Peter is acting as an adversary to the mission of Jesus. Peter is opposing the work of God, and thus in that moment acting as the satan.

There’s even an Old Testament story in which God is described as “ha satan.”

In Numbers 22:22, God sends an angel to block the path of the prophet Balaam. “God’s anger was kindled because (Balaam) was going, and the angel of the LORD took his stand in the road as his adversary.” In this instance, translators chose to actually translate “ha satan” as “adversary,” rather than transliterate the Hebrew into the name, “Satan.” Perhaps they were uncomfortable translating the verse to say “the angel of the LORD took his stand in the road as Satan.” But it’s the exact same Hebrew word, “ha satan.” The angel of the LORD stood as the satan against Balaam the prophet.

So “the satan” is a fluid image in the scriptures. When John the Seer refers to the satan, he doesn’t depict the satan with a pitchfork or horns or a red cape, as we might today. He depicts the satan as a seven-headed dragon. They are both images, one modern and one ancient, used to symbolize or personify an evil force that operates in opposition to God.

Just as the prophet Isaiah used the imagery of the dragon to represent the northern invaders, and just as the psalmist used the imagery of the dragon to represent Egypt, so John uses the imagery of the dragon, whom he calls the satan, to represent the power of the Roman Empire arrayed against the Kingdom of Christ.

So, if the satan is not a literal person or being, then what are we to make of it? How are we to understand it?

Let’s be honest, much of what we think about the devil is inspired more by medieval caricatures, Hollywood movies, and Frank Peretti novels than by anything found in scripture. There’s not much of a scriptural basis to understand the devil, and most of the Bible verses we quote are taken out of context or misinterpreted. Most folks don’t really believe the devil is a two-horned, red-caped being with a pitchfork, or that he sits on a throne in hell and rules over the demons and the damned. But we have to sort through a lot of cultural clutter to find anything of value.

Jesus, likewise, had to deal with an assortment of images and traditions about the satan from his own culture.

For example, there’s an episode when Jesus cures a “demoniac” who is blind and mute. The Pharisees (a group of religious laymen who were influential in their community) insisted that, “It is only by Beelzebul, the ruler of the demons, that this fellow casts out the demons.” (Matthew 12:24)

Who is this Beelzebul?

Beelzebul, like our modern conception of the devil, is a caricature formed more by culture than by scripture. There’s no biblical basis for believing in Beelzebul … it’s strictly a cultural tradition, birthed in pagan religion and adapted by generations of Hebrews.

Originally, Beelzebul, whose Hebrew name is Ba’al Zebûb, is introduced in the Old Testament as the god of the Philistine city of Ekron (2 Kings 1:2). “Ba’al” means “lord” and “Zebûb” means either “dwelling” or “flies” (it’s sometimes hard to sort out ancient languages). It’s possible that “Lord of the Flies” was a reference to the supposed healing powers of this Canaanite deity, who expelled flies that caused sickness. This makes sense in light of the story from 2 Kings, which is about an Israelite king who goes to Beelzebul to receive healing. But it’s also possible that, over the centuries, the name morphed from “Lord of the Heavenly Dwelling” into the pejorative “Lord of the Flies” because Zebûb is similar to the Hebrew word for flies, and was meant to associate a false god with the pests feasting on excrement.

Somewhere along the way, Beelzebul became associated with demons. Because generations of Israelites were exiled into foreign lands, or lived under the rule of successive empires, or rubbed shoulders with neighboring pagan cultures, it’s easy to understand how foreign ideas about heaven and hell, demons and angels, could seep into their own consciousness. Just think about how much of Eastern religious philosophy, from yoga to meditation to mindfulness, has become part of our own culture in the United States.

In some strands of this amalgamation of Jewish and pagan tradition, Beelzebul was among the highest-ranking demons, second-in-command under Satan. In other strands, Beelzebul was synonymous with Satan. This seems to be the tradition the Pharisees embraced when they accused Jesus of being in league with Beelzebul. Again, there is nothing like this taught in the Old or New Testament; it’s strictly a cultural mythology that arose as a result of foreign influences.

So Jesus responds to the Pharisees by saying,

“Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand. If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? If I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your own exorcists cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come to you.” (Matthew 12:25–28)

Let’s begin unraveling this story by asking a simple question: Do we believe in the literal existence of a Canaanite deity named Beelzebul? No, of course not, no more than we believe in the pantheon of Greek and Roman gods and goddesses. Do you think Jesus really believed in the literal existence of a Canaanite deity named Beelzebul? No, of course not. Jesus believed in the One True God, whom he called Father.

Likewise, there’s no reason to believe in the literal existence of a demon (of whatever rank) named Beelzebul, and no reason to believe that Beelzebul and Satan are two names for the same being. That’s just an ancient tradition, based on mythology and misunderstanding. But Jesus didn’t challenge the belief of his listeners in a literal being named Beelzebul. Instead, Jesus takes advantage of their superstition to make a larger point. He utilizes their own argument to help them see their error.

Jesus warned his listeners about the spirit of opposition that can lay waste to a kingdom, or a city, or a household if it’s allowed to fester. When we are divided, we are weakened. When we separate into antagonistic tribes (or political parties, or socio-economic groups), we are following a divisive spirit, we are being led by the spirit of Beelzebul. This spirit is the satan. And Jesus comes to cast out the satan, to heal division and bring unity.

Evil is so pervasive, so common to our experience, yet feels so utterly alien to who we are and who we want to be, that we naturally grasp for an explanation outside ourselves. We look for a source outside ourselves to blame for the evil in the world because it is too painful to blame ourselves. We all say we desire peace and unity, yet we all yield to the temptation of conflict and divisiveness. We all cherish love and peace, yet we all treat others in ways that are unloving and act in ways that are anything but peaceful. If you don’t believe me, just open a social media app on your phone.

So we need some kind of language to describe this phenomenon, the very real existence of evil within us and among us. It’s helpful to consider the satan (or, Satan) as a personification of evil. That is, a helpful way of understanding and creatively portraying the very real phenomenon of evil that exists in the world. Much as Uncle Sam is a personification of the United States, which of course is a very real country. Uncle Sam is not an actual person, though it is sometimes helpful to depict Uncle Sam when we want to say something about the United States.

Just as the ancient prophets and psalmists used the imagery of the dragon to personify the evil empires that attacked them, so we can use the imagery of a red-caped, horned devil with a pitchfork to personify the evil instincts, attitudes, and actions that pervade the human experience. We can call this personification, this image, by the name of Satan (or Beelzebul) if we wish … so long as we remember that we are figuratively referring to the phenomenon of evil rather than to an actual person/being.

Brian Zahnd, in his book, “Postcards from Babylon,” offers another helpful way of understanding the phenomenon of evil:

But is the devil an actual personage? I think the answer is … almost. I understand the devil as more than a metaphor, but less than a person; the devil is a phenomenon — but a phenomenon so complex that it verges on self-awareness.

Consider hurricanes. Hurricanes are meteorological phenomena; they are highly organized and extremely dangerous weather systems. We are so in awe of their destructive power that we personify them by giving them names. Camille, Hugo, Andrew, Katrina. Naming hurricanes doesn’t mean we believe there is a person in the sky named Katrina wreaking havoc on New Orleans. But if we say Katrina isn’t a person, that doesn’t mean Katrina doesn’t exist! Katrina very much exists and she is very dangerous. But hurricanes are simple compared to Satan. Hurricanes are weather systems formed by moist warm air, the rotation of the earth, and a few other relatively simple factors. The satanic, on the other hand, is generated from the greatest complexity we know anything about — the complexity of the human psyche and human social structures. Out of human anxiety, rivalry, rage, and blame, the devil is born …

But in saying that the devil is a spiritual and sociological phenomenon — more than a metaphor, less than a person — let no one say I don’t believe the devil is real! Of course I believe the devil is real! The devil is more real than Hurricane Katrina that (who?) claimed 1,833 lives. It’s true — “the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.”

Do I believe in spiritual forces of evil? Yes, I just don’t believe there is literally a dragon flying around in outer space, orbiting the earth. Any more than I believe there exists a horned being with a pitchfork and a red cape. Any more than I believe there exists a personage, or being, wearing the name tag “Satan” or “Beelzebul.”

I believe in a literal ha satan, but a figurative Satan.

John the Seer doesn’t believe in a literal being named Satan, either. John describes the satan being thrown into the lake of fire along with death and hades and the beast (more prophetic imagery that we’ll discuss later). Death, Hades, and Beast are all symbolic figures, images used to represent a real phenomenon. If we don’t take them literally, how can we take the satan literally? How can a literal being share the same fate as these figurative beings? How can a literal being be thrown into a figurative lake of fire? Mixing literal and figurative images together makes a hodgepodge of John’s vision. If death and hades and beast are figurative, then so is the satan.

But I do believe there is a spiritual reality that is being represented by the symbolic imagery of the satan, the devil, the dragon, the ancient serpent. Those images depict something real and consequential with which we must grapple.

Evil is real, it is literal. Human beings share a universal experience of evil. (I would prefer to say we are undeveloped, or un-evolved, or still a work in progress, rather than say we are sinful or evil, but that’s another subject for another day). We all suffer from the adversity of hate, or selfishness, or jealousy, or greed. When evil targets us, opposes us, we can call it the satan.

When the scriptures remind us that our battle is not against flesh and blood, but against spiritual forces of evil, we understand those spiritual forces exist within us, and within others, but also beyond us. There is a sense in which evil lies in the spaces between human beings, in the tensions of our relationships, giving rise to a phenomenon that is easier to describe with images than explanations, easier to understand when we personify it as a being named Satan.

Psychologist and author Richard Beck, in his book “Old Scratch,” sums it up well:

Shall I say it again? The Devil is real. I’d love to have a Christianity full of rainbows and daisies, full of love and inclusion. But there are forces working against love and inclusion in the world, and some of those forces are at work in my own heart and mind. We call those forces hate and exclusion, to say nothing about everything else that is tearing the world to shreds, pushing the loving and gracious rule of God out of the world. Hate is the satan of love. Exclusion is the satan of inclusion. War is the satan of peace. Oppression is the satan of justice. Tearing down is the satan of building up. Competition is the satan of cooperation. Revenge is the satan of mercy. Harm is the satan of care. Hostility is the satan of reconciliation.

This has been a long chapter, probably too long. Why am I spending so much virtual ink belaboring this point? Because it seems to me that those who want to blame the devil for their troubles, who are always looking for demons to blame, tend to find them behind every bush. Or possessing every enemy. It’s easier to point to the devil than to point to myself. It’s easier to blame the satan than to do the hard work of reconciliation and justice … first in my own heart, then in my relationships with other people.

We need the accountability that comes from owning up to our own role in creating and perpetuating the satan. We also need hope, and when we recognize the complex source of evil and unmask it’s power, we can do something about it.

“Resist the devil,” the scripture says, “and he will flee.”