In the Wisdom of Solomon, we read:
But through the devil's (ο
διαβολος) envy death entered into the world, and those who belong to his
company experience it. (Wisdom of Solomon 2:24 NRSV)
Some believe this is a reference to Cain, not the devil/Satan,
and often couple this verse with the following from John:
Ye are of your father the devil (ο
διαβολος), and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the
beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When
he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of
it. (John 8:44)
According to Christadelphian
apologist Duncan Heaster, in his The Real Devil, pp. 419-20:
3. John 8:44 is also a reference
to Cain, the first murderer – “he was a murderer from the beginning” (Gen.
4:8–9). He “abode not in the truth” as he was the father of the seed of the
serpent who corrupted the true way of worshipping God (see exposition of Gen.
6:2 for more on this: “Suggested Explanations”, No. 4). The letter of John often
alludes to the Gospel of John, and 1 John 3:12,15, is an example; it confirms
this interpretation: “Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one (i.e. the Devil –
Mt. 13:19 cp. Mk. 4:15) and slew his brother...Whosoever hateth his brother (as
Cain did) is a murderer”. However, it is also true that John 8:44 alludes to
the serpent as well. The serpent told the first lie, “Ye shall not surely die”
(Gen. 3:4); he did not abide in the truth; he was a murderer in the sense that
he brought about the death of Adam and Eve. “He is a liar, and the father of
it”. Cain was not a super–human person called the Devil, but an ordinary man.
He characterized sin, the Devil. The way in which the fire consumed Abel’s
offering but not Cain’s is paralleled by the fire burning up Elijah’s offering
but leaving those of the apostate Jewish Baal worshippers (1 Kings 18:19–40).
This would associate Cain with apostate Jews, i.e. the Jewish Devil.
On Wisdom of Solomon 2:24, John Levison wrote that:
WisSol. 2.24 raises two pertinent
questions. 1. To what does φθονω δε διαβολου refer. 2. What kind of death
entered; was it physical, spiritual or both?
Two interpretations of ‘the
devil’s/enemy’s envy are possible. First, the laconic phrase may be based upon
the view that Satan deceived Eve because he envied Adam and Eve (see 2En 31;
Vita 10-17). Second, διαβολου
is to be translated, ‘of the enemy’, and constitutes an allusion to Cain’s
murdering Abel. This is supported in two ways: 1. The sage employs ‘types’ whom
people of his own day resemble. Cain functions as the type of the impious
murder of an innocent person, i.e. the
situation about which the author writes in 2.1-3.11. In this context, the
allusion is timely. 2. In 10-3-4 Cain is contrasted with Adam and made
responsible for the flood. Most importantly, Cain’s action in 10.3-4 is
precisely that of the opponents whom the sage addresses in 1.16-3.11. Cain
destroys himself by killing another; the impious opponents destroy themselves
by killing the righteous (see 5.3ff.). ‘The tragedy of Cain and Abel is being
reenacted in every age: Cain inflicts physical death and chooses for himself
spiritual death, while Abel is the type of the just who suffer in the body, but
are heirs of immortality’ [J.A.F. Gregg The Wisdom of Solomon, The
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges [Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1909], p. 23]. In my opinion, ‘envy’ should be attributed to ain and
not to the devil, for the activity of the opponents and the activity of Cain as
an ‘enemy’ are parallel. Whichever view is correct, it is obvious that the
author adapts the Genesis narratives. If the allusion is to Genesis 3, then the
devil appears as a temper. If the allusion is to Genesis 4, then Cain is seen
as the cause of death through this first murder in human history. Neither view
has any precedent in Genesis. (John R. Levison, Portraits of Adam in Early
Judaism: From Sirach to 2 Baruch [Journal for the Study of the
Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series 1; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1988], 51-52,
emphasis added)