© Charles Chandler

 

A similar and slightly stronger inference can be drawn from the fact that Satan is mentioned by name (i.e., as a proper noun in the original Hebrew) in the story of Balaam's Donkey,^1,2 which occurs just before the Heresy of Peor. In those passages, "Satan" is typically translated as a common noun, meaning "the adversary." But if that was the intent, the word would have been prefixed by "the" (in Hebrew, the letter "heh"), and it wasn't.³ So it should be read as "Adversary" (proper noun), not "the adversary" (common noun), or more easily just as "Satan," since it was a name, not its definition. And as a name, it's cognate with Seti. Outside of its historical context, these passages have presented an interesting challenge to redactors, translators, and theologians. Satan is described as a supernatural being who harassed Balaam and Job, but not as a god — rather, Satan was one of God's messengers. Then the interpretations range from Satan being the preferred messenger when somebody on Earth was due for some conflict, to Satan being an adversary of God himself. The secular treatment is simpler — Satan was originally Seti I, who was sympathetic to the cause of the Hebrews, and who harassed Balaam & Job (i.e., Esau & Jacob) because they were harassing the Hebrews. For Seti to be described as a messenger, instead of God himself (i.e., the pharaoh), the donkey incident would have occurred when Seti was still the crown prince under Ramesses I, 1292~1290 bce, a time when Seti was actively campaigning in the Levant. Esau & Jacob's descendants seem never to have forgiven Seti, remembering him as an evil god (i.e., bad pharaoh).