In his Frontiers of the Reformation (1998), Auke Jelsma, in the chapter “The Devil and Protestantism” discussed the Satanology and Demonology of Balthasar Bekker:
The Devil in the history of the Dutch Reformation
The most crushing critique of the then current
belief in the Devil and demons was given by Balthasar Bekker (1634-97) in his
four-volume study De botoverde Weereld. To combat the persecution of
witches and the now orthodox demonology Bekker appeals, under the influence of
the teachings of René Descartes (1595-1650), to the Bible, common sense and a
sober analysis of the reports on sorcery and witchcraft. One of this most
important against the then current views was their pagan origin and the way in
which they were developed. When one wats to free oneself from pagan idolatry
and ‘popish’ superstition, one should no longer harbour such ideas, according
to Bekker. The liberation of the Roman yoke can only be complete if one
distances oneself from the wild fantasies as well.
The Devil does exist, in his opinion, but not in
the way and with the means of power that people ascribe to him. ‘And so as a
result of the Devil’s insignificance the realm of magic should perish’ (Bekker,
De botoverde Weereld, vol. III. p. 1). Bekker’s assumption was that the
Devil had been banned by God to hell immediately after his fall, and that
therefore his influence should be regarded as extremely small. All those stories
about evil spirits and women who have made a pact with the Devil, should be
dismissed as nonsense. Of course he also pays attention to the
counter-arguments, which were mainly taken from the Bible. He analyses all the
verses that speak of angels, evil spirits, the Devil or Satan, and he concludes
that there is no reason to believe in the existence of demons as demi-gods or
sub-gods. The accounts o good or fallen angels contradict one another and are
unclear. It is true that the New Testament mentions several times Jesus driving
our evil spirits, but one needs to realize that Jesus adapted his actions and
words to the view of his time. (Auke Jelsma, Frontiers of the Reformation:
Dissidence and Orthodoxy in Sixteenth-Century Europe [Aldershot, U.K.: Ashgate,
1998], 36-37)
So,
while Balthasar Bekker rejected the ontological existence of demons, he did affirm
the ontological existence of a personal Satan.
Earlier
in the chapter, Jelsma presented an early proponent of the “no external, personal Satan” doctrine:
One of the first opponents of the belief in the
existence of a personal Devil and of evil spirits was the glass-painter David
Joris (c. 1501-56). Other Mennonite teachers proclaimed similar views. (Ibid.,,
35)
The
corresponding footnote for Joris’ Satanology presents the following source:
Gary K. Waite, 'David Joris en de opkomst van de
sceptische traditie jergens de duivel in de vroegmoderne Nederlanden', in Duivelsbeelden,
eds G. Rooikakkers, L. Dresen-Coenders and M. Geerdes (Baarn, 1994), pp. 216-31.
(Ibid., 35 n. 30)
For more on Satan and Demons, see:
