INTERVIEW

October 26, 2011

Dumping Satan: Its Time to Let Go

By EMILY MANU EL

The Quest for the Historical Satan

Miguel De La Torre
Fortress Press (2011)

The history of Christianity, as atheists are fond of reminding us, is one that has been drenched
in blood. Whether religious war, inquisition, or colonial violence, theres been great evil
committed in the name of God. What role has the idea of Satan played in the development of
this culture? Theologian Miguel De La Torre, with co-author Albert Hernndez, has just
published a book, The Quest For the Historical Satan, that takes this question by the tail.
I spoke recently with De La Torre about the disastrous legacy the idea of Satan has bequeathed
to Christianity, the dark side of God, and about the persistence of that Obama-as-Antichrist
campaign.
Whats the general idea behind this new book?
Gods portrayal as a character of absolute goodness is the result of a theology that is read into
the Christian Scriptures, yet which is not necessarily supported by a close reading of the texts.
Not only is this theology challenged by the Bible, it is also challenged by existentially and
morally comparing such a theology of absolute Good versus absolute Evil with the realities of
life. All have faced, or will face, tragedy, misery, illness, and deathevents will occur that appear
unfair, leading most of us to question if any sense of cosmic justice and mercy truly exists.
When we consider the billions of senseless deaths, tragedies, and atrocities which define human
history, it would seem that history denies more than it confirms the paternal love of a caring and
merciful father God. One is forced to ask, Where is God?
In a very real way, the search for the historical Satan is an attempt to justify Gods grace while
legitimizing the reality and presence of evil in human history. It appears that the development of
Satan was, to a certain extent, trying to save God from appearing as the source of evil that is so
much a part of the reality of human suffering and death.
One of the fascinating things about the book is the way you trace the changes in
conception across language, as with the Greek word daimonion which simply

1 of 5

meant god or spirit. Did you think that shifts across languages reflect some of
the later themes in terms of demonization of Otherness?
That was one of the things that we immediately discovered, that making the Other the demon or
the representation of evil allowed those defending truth and honesty and righteousness to
commit all types of horrors upon that they had defined as monstrous. That led us to thinking
about how can we rethink Satan in such a way that will not lead us to demonize others.
You conclude with the idea of Satan as a trickster figure. Is that idea something
you imagine contemporary Christians will be drawn to?
Quite frankly, the image of the trickster was always there, specifically in the Hebrew Bible; its a
tradition of re-interpretation that makes Satan into the figure of absolute evil. My co-author and
I look to the Hebrew Bible with an understanding of the ambiguity of goodness and evil. How
will Christians today accept that? I dont think that people are going to be waking immediately to
this understanding, because weve had over two thousand years of conditioning. But Im hoping
it will at least begin a conversation.
You suggest that the personified Satan emerges as a solution to the central
question of what theologians call theodicyhow can God be good when evil
exists?
The book definitely wrestles with the whole theodicy question: how can an all-loving
all-powerful God allow such evil to occur? But when we looked at the Hebrew Scripture, we
really noticed that theres a dark side to God. Even in Judaism today, there is this recognition
that God does have a dark side.
What the creation of Satan has done is really save God from how the scripture understood God.
Amos reminds us, If there is evil in a city, has Yahweh not done it? (Am. 3:6). The prophet
Isaiah understands God to say, I form light and create darkness, make peace and create evil, I
Yahweh do all these things (45:7). This is a God who sends evil spirits to torment, as in the case
of Saul (1 S. 18:10) or Jeroboam (1 K. 14:10). We take those texts very seriously in trying to
ascertain the very character of God.
So in some ways youre re-evaluating God as well as Satan.
Well at the end of the book, we conclude that if Satan is indeed nothing but a servant of Satan,
then it is God who is ultimately responsible for all that God doesespecially if you look at the
book of Job. If thats the case, that brings us some very disturbing questions about the very
character of God.
In many ways, the picture you draw of Christendom is almost two thousand years
of evil committed in the name of preventing evil. Is a religionless Christianity, of
the kind imagined by death of God theologians, a way out of this?

2 of 5

No, not really. I think thats a very liberal approach to the issue. I dont think either of us, Albert
Hernandez or myself, is conservative or liberal, theologically speakingthats a very Eurocentric
divide within religious thinking. Were instead trying to understand religion from the
perspective of marginalized people, people who are suffering, of people who are the Other
whether it be the women during the witch hunts or Jews or Muslims during the Inquisition.
Were not denying God; what were trying to do is understand is what is this character of God
that seems to be absent when millions upon millions of people die horrible deaths in the name of
Jesus. Thats what were trying to wrestle with. And in that wrestling, we didnt exactly come to a
tidy conclusion.
Does a trickster Satan offer an insufficient image for the evil of things like the
Holocaust?
We do spend some time talking about the Holocaust. But when we demonize the Nazis to such a
degree and default to us being the good guys, that allows us to not pay attention to the evil we
were doing here: medical experiments we were doing on African Americans in Tuskegee, and
also on Guatemalans and Hispanics during the same time period. While the Nuremberg trials
were going on, we were also involved in human experiments.
Its not to dismiss the evil of the Holocaust, but rather to recognize that there by the grace of God
go wewe also are capable of doing that evil. And thats what we were trying to get at. If we
concentrate on absolute good and absolute evil, were always able to save ourselves from being
represented as absolute evil. And to a certain degree, we have to remember that in the minds of
the Nazis, they were the absolute good, protecting the German people from the absolute evil of
Jews. These terms, depending on whos using them, can excuse the use of all types of atrocities.
In many ways, this seems a critique of American exceptionalism.
Absolutely. No question about it. We tried to show this in the book, that when we Americans
continuously refer to ourselves as the beacon on the hill or the lighthouse of the world, we
imagine it excuses us of all the evil that were engaged in globally.
Theres a picture of President Obama as the Antichrist in the book. How
widespread are those images?
Very. When we were doing the research, we found literally hundreds of images of Barack Obama
as a demon, with 666 on his forehead, and horns. That was just one of the images that we were
able to find. If you do a Google search of Obama and Satan you may be shocked by just how
much he has been demonized by a segment of the US populationwhether its as specific as the
Antichrist slur, or just that hes satanic and evil.
What are the historical links between these images of Obama and other
demonization of men of color in this country?

3 of 5

Thats always been part of the tradition. Im old enough to remember when John F. Kennedy
was shot, and people were expecting that he was the Antichrist and was going to rise from the
dead and create the New World Orderand that was because he was a Catholic. So youve
always had politicians being demonized as an extent, but quite frankly not to the extent that
Obama has been. I cant recall any previous president who was considered to be Antichrist
material, with the exception of Kennedy, so Im left wondering how much of this is because hes
a black man; and, as part of the conversation has been also been about if hes a secret Muslim,
how much that is playing into it.
You trace a general rise in the demonization of Muslims after September 11. How
much historical baggage does that have?
I think a tremendous baggage. It does not allow us to consider what grievances Muslims have
against the United States. The answer to 9/11 was, officially, well, they hate our freedom,
without any real, critical thoughtwhen obviously there had been frustrations that went on for
generations that erupted in such violence. Its hard to seriously listen to anyone when youre
busy demonizing them. The result is that we never have an opportunity to really talk. I mean, its
as if having a conversation with Islam is negotiating with Satan himselfthis demonization is
preventing us from honest discourse and peaceful resolution.
Is there a bridgeable gap between those who see any kind of reconciliation as
Satanic, and those who might see it as divinely-mandated, through images of
hospitality?
There are certainly those within faith traditions who believe that the making of peace is a
religious mandate. Unfortunately, especially within this country, we have such a vile reaction to
Islam that I fear that those who believe that any conversation with Muslims, or anyone who has
a different opinion of us, is compromising with evil and therefore even treasonouswell, that
seems to be the dominant discourse in the politics of this country.
And here I think it goes back to how we have come to understand Satan. If instead of looking at
Satan as the manifestation of total evil, but were able to see the evolution of this figure, and the
ambiguity it holds, we might not have this knee-jerk reaction where we cant have even a
conversation with whomever we define as our Other.
You can see the same demonization occurring across the political fieldwith
undocumented immigrants, for instance.
I remember when Hispanics were considered hard workers from a noble race. And just five, six
years later, Hispanics are just these evil criminals who are coming to kill you and kill me and
rape our women and steal our jobs. Its been so quick that my head is spinning.
Its interesting given that Hispanics have historically been Catholic. Do you think
theres a Protestant/Catholic thing going on there?

4 of 5

No question about it. There are many Protestant groups that look at the Vatican as the
Antichrist, the Pope as the Antichrist. They look at the Roman Catholic Church as the Church of
Satan. Ive seen it in many fundamentalist churches, some Pentecostalist churchesthis
demonization of Roman Catholicism. And thats problematic again.
You kind of see that going on with Mitt Romney. You see this hes Mormon, therefore hes not
Christian, we have to watch out for him. You see that stirring now. Not as strong as when JFK
was running for office, but it hasnt gone away.
Do you think the demonization of the other is built into American DNA?
It definitely undergirds our politics and how we see the world, but I dont want to limit this to
just Americaits just very visible right now in this society and this culture. My Spaniard
ancestors, for example, demonized Native Americans and committed genocide to an extent that
hasnt been witnessed since. Thats why the historical pieces are so important in the book; we
kept going through history to see how this sort of demonization reared its ugly head every so
many centuries, and the devastation it created.
All people can fall into this trap. Unfortunately for us as Christians, weve done such an excellent
job in this demonization process that by now we have it down pat. Thats the sad thing, that
those of us who claim to be following the Prince of Peace have made the Prince of Peace into this
warrior thats given us license to slaughter whoever we see as the enemy. Thats what the
heritage of Satan has given Christianity.
One of your more shocking conclusions in the book was when you suggest we
might need to discard Satan altogether, just throw out the whole idea completely.
I think that Christianity as a whole would do a lot better if we did not have this constant
presence of evil. Maybe then we could notice that this ambiguity that exists in other people also
exists in us and we wouldnt have this mandate to destroy whatever we define as absolute evil.
In some ways when we destroy the Other we destroy ourselves.
Oh, absolutely. Because not only do we destroy the other but in so doing we lose our own
humanity.

Religion Dispatches 2011. All rights reserved. Reproduction of materials from any Religion Dispatches pages without written
permission is strictly prohibited.

5 of 5