The purpose of this article is threefold: (1) to examine Jacob’s teachings about the devil and his minions; (2) to note where Jacob appears to influence or be influenced by other figures and texts; and (3) to highlight where he is innovative, either with respect to the content of his contributions or to their theological clarity in comparison to the contributions of others. The value of such an investigation, I believe, is that it provides resources for tracing the development of theology in the Nephite tradition, which is still an understudied subject in Book of Mormon scholarship. I locate myself in a vein of inquiry which seeks to situate the theology of the Book of Mormon historically and in language that is intelligible to those both inside and outside of the Latter-day Saint faith. To be clear, this is not a study of Latter-day Saint “doctrine,” which is authoritative, declared by leaders of the Church, and distilled from sources including but not limited to the Book of Mormon. Instead, my focus is exclusively on Jacob’s theological assumptions, where they might originate, and how they might inform other Book of Mormon figures’ teachings about the devil and his minions.

As I have intimated, demonology is a branch of theology which concerns primarily nonhuman evil beings that are antagonistic toward God and his purposes. In the Book of Mormon, such beings are referred to by various names, including demons, devils, unclean spirits, evil spirits, lying spirits, the devil’s angels, the devil, and Satan, with some of these names occasionally referring to the same being or class of beings (see Tables 1 and 2).[1] For the sake of convenience, when I refer to evil nonhuman beings in the collective, I use the term demons.[2] Concentrated discourse about such beings appears most frequently in the recorded words of Nephi₁, Lehi₁, Jacob, Abinadi, Alma₂, Amulek, and Mormon₂. As I will argue, Jacob was a significant and influential part of this tradition of thinkers and is responsible for some of the most innovative teachings regarding demons in the Book of Mormon.

What Kind of Being is the Devil?

One of Jacob’s significant theological contributions relates to what kind of being the devil is. To better understand Jacob’s claim and how it is distinct from other teachings in the Book of Mormon, it will be helpful to first review how demons are differentiated from one another in the text.

Unclean Spirits

Two classes of demonic spirits appear in the Book of Mormon: unclean spirits and devils.[3] It is not clear however, whether these beings are different species/classes of beings or merely perform different functions. “Unclean spirits” are mentioned only twice—once by Nephi₁ and once by Mormon₂—and are never referred to by any other title. In a vision Nephi₁ sees Jesus healing “multitudes of people who were sick, and who were afflicted with all manner of diseases, and with devils and unclean spirits” (1 Nephi 11:31). And Mormon₂ records that Nephi₃ “cast out devils and unclean spirits; and even his brother did he raise from the dead” (3 Nephi 7:19). In both instances, unclean spirits inhabit human beings, cooperate with devils in some of their activities, need to be cast out by divine power, and are linked to physical or mental ailments. This is not to say that unclean spirits are coterminous with or cause such ailments, only that they are described as being in the same place at the same time as them. Significantly, unclean spirits are never explicitly portrayed as interested in human morality in the Book of Mormon—that is, as instigators of sin or temptation.

Devils

Devils are distinct from unclean spirits in the Book of Mormon. They are mentioned nine times and appear in the recorded words of Nephi₁ (1 Nephi 11:31), Jacob (2 Nephi 9:9, 37),King Benjamin (Mosiah 3:6), Mormon₂ (3 Nephi 7:19–22), Jesus (3 Nephi 14:22), and Moroni₂ (Mormon 9:24).[4] There are only two instances in which devils are unambiguously referred to by different titles. Jacob equates devils to the devil’s angels, or more precisely, to “angels to a devil” (2 Nephi 9:9), and Benjamin equates devils to “evil spirits” (Mosiah 3:6; compare Luke 8:2). Elsewhere, devils are closely linked to “lying spirit(s)” [5] and “demons,”[6] but it is not explicitly stated that they are equivalents (see Table 1).

Table 1: Aliases of Devils

Note: Asterisks represent instances in which the terms named are closely linked to devils but are not described as equivalents.

Two ways of speaking about devils are discernible in the Book of Mormon. Nephi₁ (1 Nephi 11:31), Benjamin (Mosiah 3:6), Mormon₂ (3 Nephi 7:19, 22), and Moroni₂ (Mormon 9:24) link devils primarily to physical or mental ailments—for example, sickness, disease, infirmity, and death. Their portrayal of devils thus mirrors that of unclean spirits in the text and echoes several biblical assumptions about devils, primarily assumptions from the New Testament.[7] Jacob, however, departs from this way of thinking. In fact, he never explicitly depicts devils as operative in mortal human life at all. Rather, Jacob’s focus is the eschatological status of devils (that is, their existence in the end times as recipients of God’s judgment) and their association with the devil, who “stirreth up the children of men unto secret combinations of murder and all manner of secret works of darkness” and who “delighteth” in idolatry (2 Nephi 9:9, 37).[8] Jacob is thus distinct from Nephi₁ in that he explicitly links devils to the devil and his work, and by extension to human immorality.

The Devil is a Devil

It is here in 2 Nephi 9 that Jacob asserts that the devil and other “devils” belong to the same class of spiritual beings. In other words, according to Jacob, the devil is “a devil,” as opposed to an unclean spirit (2 Nephi 9:8–9). By this point in the Book of Mormon, “the devil” is the most frequently used title for God’s primary antagonist.[9] Additionally, although always gendered male, the devil does not have the same kind of body as humans. Rather, he is a “spirit” that can possess or inhabit embodied beings.[10] What we see in 2 Nephi 9 is a more sophisticated demonological taxonomy beginning to emerge, according to which both devils and unclean spirits are linked to physical or mental ailments, but only devils, of which the devil is one, are linked to human immorality (see Table 2).

Table 2: Unclean Spirits and Devils

Jacob’s understanding of the devil likely originates from his father’s similar (albeit more convoluted) claim in 2 Nephi 2. In this passage, Lehi₁ teaches that “an angel of God, according to that which is written, had fallen from heaven; wherefore, he became a devil, having sought that which was evil before God” (v. 17). When Lehi₁ attributes his views to “that which is written,” he seems to refer at least to Isaiah 14:12, which reads: “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!”[11] Having equated this fallen angel to “a devil” in the general sense, Lehi₁ then equates this “devil” to “that old serpent” in the garden of Eden. He then equates “that old serpent” to “the devil, who is the father of all lies” (2 Nephi 2:18; emphasis added). Accordingly, Jacob is unique not in his claim that the devil is a devil, but in the relative simplicity and clarity with which he makes this claim.[12] He also specifies that the fallen angel is “the devil” quicker than Lehi₁, whose first claim is that the angel is “a devil” before clarifying that this devil is “the devil” (see Table 3).

Table 3: Lehi and Jacob on the Identity of the Devil

In terms of Jacob’s influence on later figures in the Book of Mormon, no subsequent author speaks about the devil’s identity in a way that explicitly echoes or challenges Jacob’s ontological classification. Instead, the devil’s epithets most commonly relate to his activities, accomplishments, or moral character, rather than his ontological nature. For example, he is described as “the father of (all) lies,” an “enemy (un)to God,” an “enemy to all righteousness,” an “awful monster,”[13] “the master of sin,” “the evil one,” “the adversary,” and “the father of contention” (see Table 4). In this respect, the influence of Jacob’s taxonomy is arguably insignificant.

Table 4: Aliases of the Devil

In another sense, however, Jacob’s thought may be influential on later Book of Mormon demonology. Chronologically speaking, after Jacob, Book of Mormon authors more explicitly portray devils as having an interest in human immorality. This reflects Jacob’s more robust picture of demonic activity. By classifying the devil as a devil, Jacob expands the agency of all devils to comprise an investment in human sin, which devils do not have prior to 2 Nephi 9 (when Jacob first speaks about them), but which the devil has had since 1 Nephi 12. Put simply: prior to Jacob, no “devils” in the Book of Mormon are associated with human sin; after Jacob associates them with sin, this assumption becomes more prevalent. Benjamin, for example, describes devils as “the evil spirits which dwell in the hearts of the children of men” (Mosiah 3:6). His use of evil instead of unclean may refer to devils’ investment in promoting human immorality. Jesus makes this motive even clearer when he states that “the devil laugheth, and his angels rejoice, because of the slain of the fair sons and daughters of my people; and it is because of their iniquity and abominations that they are fallen” (3 Nephi 9:2). Thus, perhaps reflecting Jacob’s teachings, devils are no longer associated only with physical or mental ailments. Now they are lumped in with the efforts of the devil to morally corrupt humans.

The Devil has Disembodied Minions

Jacob also argues that even though devils and the devil are the same class of being, the devil is at the top of a hierarchical relationship with others of his kind: he is “the devil of all devils” (2 Nephi 9:37). Jacob is unique not in his assumption that the devil has minions but rather in his claim that such beings include disembodied entities. For example, in the writings of Nephi₁, the devil’s minions appear to be exclusively embodied human beings who are active in the New Testament era after the death of Christ, when the devil establishes the “great and abominable church” on the earth—centuries in the future for Nephi₁ (1 Nephi 22:14).[16] These humans are referred to as the devil’s “child(ren)” and as part of his “kingdom . . . which shall be built up among the children of men . . . established among them which are in the flesh” (v. 22).[17]

I interpret the words “among the children of men” and “in the flesh” in this passage to mean that in Nephi₁’s mind, the devil’s “children” are not disembodied spirits who assist the devil in his efforts to destroy the Church of the lamb and “lead away the souls of men down to hell” (1 Nephi 14:3). Nephi₁ later seems to clarify that these are in fact embodied beings, explaining that “those who belong to the kingdom of the devil” include “harlots” (1 Nephi 13:7–8), those who persecute and kill God’s people (see 1 Nephi 13:5), and “all churches which are built up to get gain, and all those who are built up to get power over the flesh, and those who are built up to become popular in the eyes of the world, and those who seek the lusts of the flesh and the things of the world, and to do all manner of iniquity” (1 Nephi 22:23).

Jacob, on the other hand, introduces the idea that the devil also has disembodied, spiritual beings in his employ. These beings are referred to as his “devils” and his “angels” (2 Nephi 9:9, 37; compare Matthew 9:34; 12:24; Luke 11:15) and, as previously mentioned, Jacob discusses only their activities in the eschaton, or end times (2 Nephi 9:9, 16; Jacob 3:11).[18] In other words, even though Jacob links these beings to the devil and his efforts to tempt and bind humanity in the present, “devils,” or the devil’s “angels,” are never explicitly portrayed as interacting with embodied human beings in Jacob’s writings. Such interactions may perhaps be assumed, however, given that Jacob believes devils have engaged in activities that merit eternal punishment. Jacob teaches that after the final judgment, the destiny of such beings is to “go away into everlasting fire, prepared for them; and their torment is as a lake of fire and brimstone, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever and has no end” (2 Nephi 9:16).

As to the origins of Jacob’s assertion, the idea of a demonic hierarchy of disembodied beings, of which a single demon—“the devil” or “Satan”—is the head, is not present in the Book of Mormon prior to Jacob, nor is it mentioned in any of the biblical texts that were likely on the brass plates. As Gerald Messadié argues, prior to the third or second century BC,[19] “Satan and the demons . . . do not seem to have a master servant relationship, the former being nowhere referred to as the chief of the latter.” [20] In the biblical tradition, such beliefs seem to have emerged in the New Testament period (for example, see Matthew 12:24; Mark 3:22; Luke 11:15, 18). In this respect, Jacob’s demonology is more developed than the demonology of the Hebrew Bible and more in line with that of the New Testament. It is plausible that Jacob merely assumed that the devil has disembodied minions after hearing his brother Nephi₁ teach that the devil has embodied minions. Such rationale may have been the product of Jacob imagining the fate of the wicked, who follow the devil in mortality and thus will remain with him after death in their disembodied state.

Finally, the idea that the devil has disembodied minions also appears elsewhere in the Book of Mormon, perhaps reflecting Jacob’s influence on the later demonology. Demonic spirits frequently attack humans and seek to frustrate God’s purposes in a multiplicity of ways in the text (see Table 5). However, it is rare that these beings are explicitly shown to be subordinates to the devil when doing so. Only Jesus and Mormon₂ appear to present them in this way. Both authors echo Jacob’s term angel to refer to the devil’s subordinates. Jesus, whose words are recorded by Mormon₂, refers to the “everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels” and imagines the devil’s angels rejoicing at human moral failures (Mosiah 26:27; 3 Nephi 9:2). In my reading, the word his in this passage implies that the devil is superior to and/or has ownership over these “angels.” Mormon₂ similarly teaches that the devil never persuades people to do good, “neither do his angels” (Moroni 7:17).[21] As if to further distinguish these angels from wicked humans, Mormon₂ adds, “neither do they who subject themselves unto him” (v. 17). In other words, the term angels in this passage may refer to a distinct group from those embodied humans who merely subject themselves to the devil.

Table 5: Common Tactics of Demons[22]

The Devil’s Malleability

A final theological contribution of Jacob relates the devil’s ability to change form or appearance, what I will refer to as malleability. Because Jacob’s teachings about the devil’s malleability seem to be informed by but also go beyond his father’s, it will be helpful to first briefly address Lehi₁’s teachings on this subject. Lehi₁’s biblically inflected demonology—he draws on Genesis and possibly Isaiah—centers on the devil’s agency in the past: his origin story as a fallen angel of God and as the liar who deceived Adam and Eve.[23] As previously noted, he states:

And I, Lehi, according to the things which I have read, must needs suppose that an angel of God, according to that which is written, had fallen from heaven; wherefore, he became a devil, having sought that which was evil before God. And because he had fallen from heaven, and had become miserable forever, he sought also the misery of all mankind. Wherefore, he said unto Eve . . . Partake of the forbidden fruit, and ye shall not die, but ye shall be as God, knowing good and evil. (2 Nephi 2:17–18)

According to Lehi₁, the devil used to be “an angel of God” and then “became a devil” when he fell from heaven.

Jacob echoes Lehi₁’s claim about the devil’s origins, teaching that the “angel who fell from before the presence of the Eternal God . . . became the devil, . . . that being who beguiled our first parents” (2 Nephi 9:8–9) and that the wicked are “prey to his awful misery” (v. 46). That Jacob is relying on his father’s teachings in addition to the biblical text is evident in the fact that Jacob reproduces some of Lehi₁’s claims that are not found in Genesis or Isaiah (or in the entire Bible for that matter), such as the idea that the devil is “miserable.”[24] Given their proximity and relationship as father and son, it makes sense that Jacob’s demonology would be influenced by Lehi₁’s teachings as well as by the biblical texts that would have been available to both of them on the brass plates.

Jacob also, however, goes beyond his father’s teaching regarding the malleability of the devil. Whereas Lehi₁ taught that the devil used to be “an angel of God” (2 Nephi 2:17), Jacob adds that the devil also has the capacity to change back into one: he “transformeth himself nigh unto an angel of light” (2 Nephi 9:9). This is the first time such a claim is made in the Book of Mormon. It is possible that this statement means only that the devil can transform into the semblance of an angel, rather than actually becoming one, hence the phrase nigh unto in this passage (more on this below). In any case, Jacob clearly believes that the devil can alter his appearance in such a way that one could mistake him for an angel of light. Jacob’s language in 2 Nephi 9:9 is an almost-verbatim reproduction of 2 Corinthians 11:14: “Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light” (NKJV). The primary differences are twofold. First, Jacob uses the term the devil rather than Satan. In fact, the word Satan never appears in Jacob’s writings. The second difference is that Jacob uses the word nigh to qualify the devil’s malleability, whereas 2 Corinthians does not.

Jacob’s understanding of the devil’s malleability likely informs his unique, albeit hypothetical, claim that wicked humans may “become devils” after death (2 Nephi 9:9; compare Jacob 3:11). In this sense, his demonology cannot be divorced from other aspects of his theology. He explains:

For behold, if the flesh should rise no more our spirits must become subject to that angel who fell from before the presence of the Eternal God, and became the devil, to rise no more. And our spirits must have become like unto him, and we become devils, angels to a devil, to be shut out from the presence of our God, and to remain with the father of lies, in misery, like unto himself. (2 Nephi 9:8–9)

In this passage, we see that Jacob’s understanding of ontological fluidity is not limited to the devil but is integral to how he understands human and angelic nature as well. In summary, he claims that (1) angels can become devils, (2) humans can become devils, and (3) devils can transform into angels of light (at least in appearance).

Because ontology (that is, the study of the nature of beings) and morality are linked in Jacob’s mind, it is even more likely that devils do not actually become angels of light but can merely choose to look like them. In other words, in the case of angels and humans becoming devils, the moral character that instigates the change is still present after the change—the change reflects character. Thus, angels and humans become devils because they do devilish things. As Jacob puts it with respect to the final judgement, “They who are righteous shall be righteous still, and they who are filthy shall be filthy still; wherefore, they who are filthy are the devil and his angels” (2 Nephi 9:16). It follows from this logic that devils cannot actually become angels of light.

As to the subsequent influence of Jacob’s claims, Korihor holds similar assumptions to him regarding the devil’s malleability, saying that that the devil “appeared unto [him] in the form of an angel” (Alma 30:53). Like Jacob, Korihor, through the voice of Mormon₂, qualifies the devil’s malleability, stating that he appeared in the “form” of an angel. Additionally, Korihor is even more explicit about the devil’s wicked character, his angelic appearance notwithstanding. He explains:

The devil hath deceived me; for he appeared unto me in the form of an angel, and said unto me: Go and reclaim this people, for they have all gone astray after an unknown God. And he said unto me: There is no God; yea, and he taught me that which I should say. And I have taught his words; and I taught them because they were pleasing unto the carnal mind; and I taught them, even until I had much success, insomuch that I verily believed that they were true; and for this cause I withstood the truth, even until I have brought this great curse upon me. (Alma 30:53)

In this passage, the devil retains his devilish nature in his angelic form, still teaching falsehoods. Even though Korihor is the only other figure in the Book of Mormon to portray the devil as malleable, direct influence from Jacob’s teachings cannot be established with certainty. All that can be said is that theological teachings which originated with Jacob were still present among the Nephites generations later.

Conclusion

In this paper I have examined Jacob’s demonology, noting where he possibly influences and is influenced by other figures and texts. I have also highlighted where I believe he is innovative with respect to the content or clarity of his demonology. Based on my analysis, I propose that Jacob’s theological footprint may be seen in at least three of his claims: (1) the devil is a devil; (2) the devil has disembodied minions; and 3) the devil is malleable. In terms of his theological indebtedness, Jacob’s demonology periodically reflects his father’s, although he is not beholden to it. Jacob’s demonology is also informed by or closely mirrors biblical teachings, some of which are more clearly articulated in the New Testament. Finally, Jacob’s theological influence on later figures cannot be definitively established. After all, no subsequent author explicitly states a teaching with a qualifier such as “as Jacob says” or “Jacob taught me.” However, some teachings that originated with or were unique to Jacob in the Book of Mormon appear after his lifetime in the text, specifically in the recorded words of Benjamin, Mormon₂, Jesus, and Korihor. It may be argued, therefore, that ideas articulated by Jacob were an integral part of the development of demonology in the Nephite tradition.

Notes

[1] Mormon₂ closely associates the devil with Satan in 3 Nephi 2:2. Mormon₂ and Moroni₂ view “Satan” and “the devil” respectively as complicit in tempting Adam and Eve (see Helaman 6:21, 26; and Ether 8:25). Revelation 12:9 refers to “Satan” as “the great dragon,” “that old serpent,” and “the Devil.” See also Revelation 20:2. For overlap between how “the devil” and “Satan” operate, see Table 5.

[2] The term demons appears only once in the Book of Mormon, in Helaman 13:37. It reads, “Behold, we are surrounded by demons, yea, we are encircled about by the angels of him who hath sought to destroy our souls.” While I use it as a shorthand for all nonhuman beings that are antagonistic toward God, Samuel the Lamanite does not explicitly use it in this way. Samuel equates “demons” to “the angels of him who hath sought to destroy our souls” (v. 37), but he never explicitly states that devils are the same as demons or the devil’s angels. In other words, if one assumes that devils are the same class of being as the devil’s angels, and Samuel equates the devil’s angels to demons, then one might assume that devils are also demons. Helaman 13:37 is likely a poetic parallelism. I am indebted to Tyler Griffin for this insight.

[3] This is not counting familiar spirits. The phrase familiar spirits appears twice in the Book of Mormon and only in Nephi₁’s quotations of Isaiah (2 Nephi 18:19; 26:16). Consequently, familiar spirits do not function as actual beings in the Book of Mormon’s narrative. They are also never referred to by any other title. Nephi₁ mentions familiar spirits only in passing as he cites Isaiah 8:19 and 29:4, and beyond some possible innovation with the Isaiah text on Nephi₁’s part, they do not seem to be a concern for Book of Mormon authors or peoples. While Nephi₁ renders both Isaiah passages with some variation, he appears to preserve Isaiah’s linking of familiar spirits to the practice of necromancy (that is, conversing with the spirits of the dead), which is condemned by the Lord in the Hebrew Bible (see Leviticus 19:31; Deuteronomy 18:10–12; 20:6; and 2 Kings 21:6). “Familiar spirit (obh)” in the Hebrew Bible may refer both to necromancer and to the spirit that is communed with. See Hoffner, s.v. “obh,” in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, ed. G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, vol. 1, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1977), 133. Because neither of these are necessarily antagonistic toward God, familiar spirits are not discussed at greater length in this chapter. On Nephi₁’s use of the term, see Joseph Spencer, The Vision of All: Twenty-five Lectures on Isaiah in Nephi’s Record (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2016), 259–60, 266–67; Robert A. Cloward, “Isaiah 29 and the Book of Mormon,” in Isaiah in the Book of Mormon, ed. Donald W. Parry and John W. Welch (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1998), 191–247; John A. Tvedtnes, “Book of Mormon Answers: ‘Fulness of the Gospel’ and ‘Familiar Spirit,’” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 7, no. 1 (1998): 74; and Samuel Morris Brown, In Heaven as It Is on Earth: Joseph Smith and the Early Mormon Conquest of Death (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012), 115–29.

[4] Devils are mentioned approximately 114 times if one includes references to “the devil” in this number.

[5] Alma₂ views being under the control of the devil, whom Jacob describes as “a devil” (2 Nephi 9:9), as analogous to being “possessed with a lying spirit” (Alma 30:42), suggesting the possibility that a devil is the same thing as a lying spirit. The phrase “lying spirit” also appears in 1 Kings 22:22–23 and in 2 Chronicles 18:21–22. Interestingly, the “lying spirit” in 1 Kings 22:22–23 appears to work with the Lord.

[6] See note 2.

[7] For example, see Matthew 4:24; 9:32–33; 10:8; 17:18; Mark 1:32, 34; 6:13; Luke 8:27–36; 11:14. Devils and unclean spirits do not appear in one another’s company in the biblical text, but in one passage a devil is referred to as an “unclean spirit” (Luke 9:42). For a Hebrew Bible example, see 1 Samuel 18:10–11, which refers to an “evil spirit.”

[8] Only Jacob (2 Nephi 9:7–9, 16) and Jesus (Mosiah 26:27) appear to argue that devils will exist in the eschaton.

[9] The title appears ninety-three times and most frequently in Alma (29 times), 2 Nephi (18 times), and 1 Nephi (13 times). No Book of Mormon author explicitly equates Satan to “the devil” or “Lucifer,” but in this work I assume they are the same being. Lucifer only appears once in a quotation of Isaiah 14:12 (see 2 Nephi 24:12).

[10] He is referred to as a “spirit” in Mosiah 3:6 and 4:14. He is assumed to possess a person in Alma 14:7.

[11] In the Christian theological tradition, the title “Lucifer” is closely linked to “Satan” because of Jesus’s statement in Luke 10—“I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven” (v. 18)—which seems to be an allusion to Isaiah 14:12. In its original context, however, the term “Lucifer” in Isaiah 14:12, which comes from the Latin rendering of the Hebrew “hêlēl ben-šāḥar (הילל בן־שׁחר),” literally “shining one, son of dawn,” likely refers to the king of Babylon. See W. G. E. Watson, s.v. “helel,” in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, ed. Karel Van Der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst, 2nd ed. (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 392–94.

[12] In this sense, Jacob is also distinct from the authors of the Bible. When “the devil” or “Satan” appear as proper names of hostile supernatural entities in the biblical text (the former name is typically a Greek translation of the latter Hebrew name), authors never specify what kind of beings these entities are, aside from periodically stating or implying that they possess bodies that can dwell inside humans (for example, see 1 Chronicles 21:1; Matthew 8:16; 12:26; Luke 4:33; 9:42).

[13] This term is also associated with “death and hell” (see 2 Nephi 9:10, 19, 26). For more on the use of the term monster in the Book of Mormon, see Daniel Belnap, “‘I Will Contend with Them That Contendeth with Thee’: The Divine Warrior in Jacob’s Speech of 2 Nephi 6–10,” Journal of Book of Studies 17, no. 1 (2008), 30–31.

[14] He is also called the “preparator” of hell once, in 1 Nephi 15:35, although Royal Skousen suggests that this is a mistake and the word meant here is most likely “proprietor.” See Skousen, Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon, Part One: 1 Nephi–2 Nephi 10 (Provo, UT: FARMS, 2014), 330–31.

[15] This title also appears in 2 Nephi 4:27; Alma 46:8; Mormon 1:19 but is not explicitly linked to the devil, Satan, or Lucifer.

[16] “Satan” is spoken of in the Book of Mormon as having only human minions. These minions are given no formal title and are portrayed generally as wicked, prideful, unrepentant, lacking the Lord’s spirit, and yielding themselves to Satan. See 1 Nephi 22:15, 26; Alma 8:9; 10:25; 27:12; Helaman 6:21; 3 Nephi 2:3; 6:15–16; 7:5; 4 Nephi 1:28; Mormon 5:18; Ether 15:19; Moroni 9:3.

[17] This language is later mirrored by Alma₂ and Mormon₂. See Alma 5:25, 39, 41; 10:28; 30:60. Alma₂ also refers to the devil’s human minions as part of his “fold,” or flock (Alma 5:39). The devil’s human minions include the wicked people of Zarahemla, Zeezrom, and Korihor. See Alma 5:20, 25, 39; 11:21; 12:4; 28:13; 30:42, 53, 60.

[18] See also Mosiah 26:27; 3 Nephi 9:2; Moroni 7:17 for later uses of the same terms. Compare Matthew 25:41; Revelation 12:9.

[19] Jacob would have lived around the 6th and into the 5th centuries BC.

[20] Gerald Messadié, A History of the Devil, trans. Marc Romano(London: Newleaf, 1996), 240.

[21] Mormon₂ is speaking of these beings as operative in the present (pre–final judgment).

[22] I do not mean to suggest in this chart that the devil, Lucifer, and Satan are distinct entities, only that when these titles are used, different tactics, abilities, and sovereignty are apportioned to each.

[23] These views derive from the Genesis biblical narrative and Isaiah 14:12. On how Lehi’s views compare to early Jewish views, see David Bokovoy, Authoring the Old Testament: Genesis–Deuteronomy (Salt Lake City: Greg Kofford Books, 2014), 207–11; and Blake Ostler, “The Book of Mormon as a Modern Expansion of an Ancient Source,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 20, no. 1 (1987): 85–87. On other possibilities of how the Lehites had access to Genesis material, see Avram Shannon, “The Documentary Hypothesis and the Book of Mormon,” in They Shall Grow Together: The Bible in the Book of Mormon, ed. Charles Swift and Nicholas J. Frederick (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2022), 249–75.

[24] Lehi₁ teaches that the devil desires “that all men might be miserable like unto himself” (2 Nephi 2:27). Alma₂ and Mormon₂ make similar claims about the devil’s emotions, although less explicitly. See Alma 41:4; Helaman 3:29; 5:12. Jacob and Jesus mention that the devil and his angels laugh, rejoice, and delight in human sin, particularly when humans engage in idolatry and murder. See 2 Nephi 9:37; 3 Nephi 9:2.