"Suter, David" wrote:
> > Jeffrey, > > Good point. Check out the discussion of the Vision/Testament of > Amram, the 4Q544 reference I sent you, in Robert Eisenmann and Michael > Wise, The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered. As I recall they argue for a > three name set of equivalences for both the good and the bad watcher > in that passage, but its entirely possible that they don't make Satan > one of the equivalences for Melchi Resha. > > Apart from Jubileees, the term satan is never used as a proper name in > the DSS. In the two times it appears it is used as a common noun. > Cf. 11QPsa 19.15. > > > What do you make of the linguistic similarity between Satan and > Mastema? Note the latter in Jubilees, and check the Eisenmann-Wise > volume for references to the Angels of Mastemoth. > > Yes, Satan and Mastema have the same root and the identification of > Satan with Mastema in Jubiless 10 seems to be a pun on that fact. But > note that in the DSS -- apart from Jubilees - the word mastema is > never accompanied as it is in Jubilees with the title "Prince" and is > never used as a name. And note too the evidence found in 4Q225 > (4QpsJub-a) that Mastema is distinguished from Belial at Qumran : > > 13. The Prince of the Mastemah was bound (or: bind) > on [account of them. The angels of holiness were [ ] > 14. the Prince of the Ma[s]temah. Belial listened to [the Prince of > the Mastemah (?) ] > > Does Satan ever become the Prince of Evil in Jewish tradition? I've > worked on Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer, and there the "Satan" role is taken > by Sama'el, the angel of death. > > According to Bamberger, he does not at least up through the Talmudic period. He is a Servant of God. See how he is praised in Baba Batra. Jeffrey -- Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon) 1500 W. Pratt Blvd. Chicago, Illinois e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
