See, besides the works cited in the coarse of this article. Trench, ffvbean LectureSy 1845-46, lecture v ; Lord's Theological and Literary Journal^ April, 1854, art. vi ; Hampden, Bampton Lectwret for 1882, lect. viii ; Soames, Latin Church during Anglo-Saxon Timegy chap, xu; Craik, Old and New (N. Y. 1860), p. 226 sq. ; Schaff, What is Church History (Phihidel. 1846, 12mo) ; English RevieWy various articles in vols, iv, vi, ix, xi ; Cunningham, Historical Theologyy i, 210 sq. ; American Presb. and Theol, RevieWy Oct. 1867, art. iv ; Donaldson, Critical History of the first three Centuries,
Devil (6 Afa/3oAoc, of which the English term is but a variation). This term signifies one who traves- ties another's character for the purpose of injuring it, a slanderery and is sometimes applied to any calumni- ator, e. g. a gossip-monger (1 Tim. iii, 11 ; 2 Tim. iii, 8; Titus ii, 3) ; but it is spoken especially, by way of eminence, of the arch enemy of man's spiritual inter- est, whom the Jews represented as continually im- pugning the character of saints before God (comp. Job i, 6 ; Riev. xii, 10 ; Zech. iii, 1). See Accuseb. In 1 Pet. V, 8, he is expressly called "the accuser (fbri- diKog) of the brethren," with a reference to forensic usages. See Advocate. The word b found in the plural number and adjective sense in 1 Tim. iii, 11; 2 * 'i, 8 ; and Tit. ii, 8. In all other cases it is used
with the article as a descriptive nme of Satae^o cept that in John vi, 70, it Is applied to Jed» **Satan" to Peter in Matt xvi, 23), becaase Ik the one permanently, and the other for the mama were doing Satan's work. (On John xi, SL see !» gelhard's CommentatiOy Erl 1794; HMWy Shkr^ p. 51-75 ; on Heb. ii, 14, Anon. De DiabtAf, GdOLl^t Oestmann,/>eibcolP<:<.p,8,Gi7ph.lS16). TW^ describes him as slandering God to n^ao, asd cat God. See Diabolus. a. The Ibanaier vock k i coarse, a part of the great work ai teDaptatiQii te ^ and b not only exemi^ified, but fllvsilzatod, m ^> general nature and tendency, by Uie nanatlTe cf Go. ilL We find there that its essential vhaawcitBkk I the representation of God as an arbitraxj and sdH ruler, seeking his own good, and not that erf fci»<»> tures. The effect is to stir up in man the spirit of ^9. dom to seek a fernded independence ; and kkimi slight step farther to impute falsehood or amk^ « God. The sucoera of the devil's slander Is smb. » only in the scriptural narrative of the Fall, hutktik cormpdons of most mythologtes, and espedslly is t> horrible notion of the divine ^ovoc, or envy, vbk ran through so many (see, e. g. Herod, i, 32; n. iC. The same slander is implied rather than expientd 2 the temptatk>n of our Lwd, and is overcome I7 the ^ which trusts in God's love even where its s%» mr be hidden from the eye (comp. the wnmaakiBg rf 1 similar slander by Peter in Acta v, 4). 5. The 0^ work, the slandering or accusing of man befbfv Gtii k as it must naturally be, unintelligible to us. The I> seeing Judge can need no accoser, and the ABr?'Jt could, it might seem, have no intercoane with ri' Evil One. But, in truth, the question touches cam mysteries, the relation of the Infinite to the finite $p it, and the permission of the existence of evil iftk the government of him who is '^ the Good." A^ 1 part of these it must be viewed — to the latter eiped^ ly it belongs ; and this latter, while it Is tbe |n^ mystery of all, is also one In which the facts are pit^ to us by incontrovertible evidence. — Smith, a. v. S« Satan.
The word "devil'* also often stands, bat m^^e- ly, in our version as a rendering of ^aiftvp^ an imp 3« spirit Arom the other world acting npon a bmBiQ l^ ing. See D^emom.
In Lev. xvii, 7, the word translated "deviT a ^^^'10 (scebr% hairyjy ordinarily a ^^ goaty'" bat reoteri '' satyr" in Isa. xiii, 21 ; xxxiv, 14 ; probaUy tll«fiig to the wood-dtemonSy resembling he-goats, snppced to live in deserts, and which were an object of klclitna and beastly worship among the heathen. See SArri.
The term rendered "devil" in Deut. xxxii,17; Psa. cvi, 87, is *TTb (shed, properly lord, Sept. and Volg.i»- mon^y an idoly since the Jews regarded idols si dcntsi that caused themselves to be worshipped by fflCB. See Idolatry.
The belief of the Hebrews down to the Bab^rkms exHe seems but dimly to have recognised either Si- tan or daemons, at least as^a ^gmaHc tenet, off M it any occasion for them, since Wtreated monlefil» a properly human act (comp. Gen. iii), and alvtj) » subjective and concrete, but regarded mtsfortnae, ae> cording to teleological axioms, as a ponisliiBeot d^ served on account of sin at the hands of a rigfatacB God, who inflicted it especially by the agaicr rf«R of his angels (2 Sam. xxiv, 16 ; comp. 2 Klagi xix, ^ and ¥ras accordingly looked apon as the proper sodi^ of every afflictive dispensation (Amos iii, 6). A^i*- ritions were part of the popular creed: there va«^ ings inimical to mankind inhabiting solitodes, bet B«t yet adopted in the association of religious idsss. See Spectre. The Axasel (q. v.) is thought by tosm t» have been held to be such a dssmon; yet, if we gwt even this, it still remains but an isc^ted beiog, o» might almost say, a mere litargical idea. Kevertk-