Satan a la mode

The Book of Mormon was profoundly unfashionable for it's time when it comes to considerations of the devil; in the midst of a non-committal vogue, it dives headfirst into making assertions about the unknown. Follow the bracketed links to see how Joseph Smith and the Gold Plates boldly put Percy Bysshe Shelley (and his ilk!) in his place. 

There may be observed in polite society a great deal of coquetting about the Devil, especially among divines. They qualify him as the evil spirit [Mormons too (because God didn't give him body): Mosiah 4:14, Mosiah 2:37]; they consider him as synonymous with the flesh [sometimes, but mostly the Devil uses the flesh as a wicked joystick: 2 Ne. 10:24, Mosiah 16:3, Mosiah 16:5, Helaman 7:15]. They seem to wish to divest him of all personality [whatever! Satan has a personality and it's horrible: 2 Ne. 28:22, Alma 30:60, Moroni 7:12]... Hell is popularly considered as metaphorical of the torments of an evil conscience [No way, Satan's a real dude not our pained psyches: 2 Ne. 2:17, Alma 30:53, Jacob 7:18, 3 Ne. 18:15] and by no means capable of being topographically ascertained [OK, so Mormons don't know where Hell is (maybe Outer Space/Darkness) but they certainly know it's physical: 1 Ne. 14:3, 1 Ne. 15:35]. No one likes to mention the torments of the everlasting fire [um...: 2 Ne. 9:16, 2 Ne. 28:23, Jacob 3:11, Jacob 6:10, Mosiah 3:27, Mosiah 26:27, Alma 12:27] and the poisonous gnawing of the worm [try 'dragon' or 'monster', buddy!] that liveth forever and ever [2 Ne. 9:16, 2 Ne. 9:19, 2 Ne. 9:26, 2 Ne. 26:22].  (From Essay on the Devil and Devils, 1820.)

In other words, if you're doubting the literal existence of Satan, his angels/devils and Hell, YOU HAD BETTER RECONSIDER! THIS SHIT IS REAL!!

"Ouch! Ouch! Ooouch!!"

Don't doubt that this is one doubt you'll be eternally sorry you never doubted! Neither popular opinion nor careful research can save you.

Becoming Satan and devils

The whole War in Heaven story gave me a lot of grief. It's supposed to be so simple and straightforward: rebellion against God is bad, so choose Good instead of giving into temptation. But let's go back and look at this story a bit more closely.

How did Lucifer fall? He was full of pride, right? He wanted the glory of God all for himself, right? Where did that evil pride and ambition come from if not from God? Did Heavenly Father, the Perfect Being, produce imperfect seed? Is it Heavenly Mother's fault that Lucifer turned rotten?

No! the believing Mormon will tell you. Good and Evil predate God and births of all of his spirit children (but don't ask why we worship Heavenly Father instead of the Goodness that predates him). God became God because he was obedient to the laws of righteousness and Lucifer became the Devil because we wasn't obedient. But where did Lucifer's faulty will to obey come from? Who first tempted Lucifer, our dear brother Morning Star, to stray from the Father?

It doesn't matter! says the believing Mormon. It was all part of the Plan. Heavenly Father needed opposition in his plan. He needed a satan. Lucifer is merely filling that extremely important role of providing bad choices to avoid. Without Satan, we wouldn't have Good and Evil to choose from.

So why is Satan being punished for his rebellion against God if his rebellion and all his tempting are so incredibly vital to the whole plan? Shouldn't he at least get awarded Best Supporting Actor in this whole charade?

One last thought: if Heavenly Father's plan was to have us all choose between his Plan and Satan's alternate, evil plan, and everyone already knew that Heavenly Father's Plan ends with Satan getting his ass kicked, why did anyone, including Satan, vote for the alternate plan?

Pride! the true believer will say again. And I say, really? I thought the rebellious spirits all wanted a guaranteed return to Heavenly Father. Wouldn't they automatically realize their rebellion was pointless the second they heard Heavenly Father say "Hey, you little fucks, stop rebelling or I'll cast you into Outer Darkness FOREVER!"? Wouldn't that have been enough to change the minds of all of those spirits who were too scared of making bad decisions in the first place?

Can you see why I doubt the veracity of this story? It lacks rhyme, reason and plausibility.

Escorting Satan

Mormon lore is a funny thing. Of all the stories you hear growing up in the LDS Church, a favorite is the story of the son of a friend of a friend who despite having Down syndrome wanted to get a patriarchal blessing. The jaw-dropping part of the story is that in this special blessing it is revealed that the reason the young man even has Down syndrome is because he had personally escorted Lucifer out of Heaven at the end of the War in Heaven and the chromosomal condition he now has somehow protects him from the temptations of the Devil!

It always sounded very fishy to me, but I doubted those doubts. I'm sure someone somewhere on Earth has been protected by a mental disability to keep him or her safe from Satan. That's totally the kind of thing a generous father would do to his extremely strong and valiant (so strong and valiant they were given the task of bouncing the Devil!) spirit child. God obviously has trust issues and is a bit of a control freak. And never mind the fact that taking away someone's accountability for his or her choices goes completely contrary to the very purpose of coming to Earth in the first place.

Mr. Satan

"The biggest lie Satan can sell you is that he doesn't exist!"

I know you don't have to sit through LDS meetings to hear this frightening warning. No matter where you hear it, the point is clear: you had better not stop believing in Satan. That muthafuckahz the real thing! And he's scary as shit!

The horns are maybe more symbolic than literal, it's true, but let's just take a moment to recognize that many, many people have had visions of a Satan with horns and wings. They're tradition at this point, and Lord knows we Mormons love tradition.

And the folks who love Satan most really prefer this more traditional approach.

Now consider for just a moment how badly Satan wants you for himself.

Terrifying! Of course, Mormons know better than the Church of Satan (those satanist assholes have totally been deceived), they know he doesn't look like a goat or have horns or wings. He looks like us, for he is our spirit brother born of our Heavenly Parents. Some say he looks a bit like Barack Obama. Others think he's white.

More important than what our fallen brother looks like is what he wants. Satan wants you to suffer, brothers and sisters. He wants you to be fucking miserable for all eternity because that's exactly the kind of heartless, bodiless bastard he is (that's right, he was too rebellious to be given a body). He tempts and torments you at all times setting traps and waiting for you to fall into sin. I don't even like to think about his evil ways.

"Taste my happiness, y'all mothafuckahz! We got this!"

Good thing other people have thought about it for me. Take Bible scholars for example. These dudes have looked very carefully at the use of the Hebrew word satan (שָּׂטָן), which means "adversary", to understand where Satan comes from. As it turns out satan is a term that describes a variety of human and celestial beings who in some way create opposition for someone else. The Devil (meaning  "slanderer"), Great Lucifer the Fallen, the Father of All Lies, doesn't come onto the scene until hundreds of years later on in the tradition of satans when the Hebrew tradition was able to absorb more of the dualism from surrounding religious traditions, at which point Satan, Yahweh's mortal enemy, was born into the world. Here's a brief explanation in video form:

So where does this leave us with regards to a scary bogeyman named Satan? Do we trust Joseph Smith's tweaking of the Christian tradition or do we recognize the tradition has untenable origins and that we've been caught up in one of the longest running ghost stories on earth today?

Pay attention to how frequently our prophets, seers and revelators use the "because Satan" argument. Why should we find that argument convincing?