Belial

← Encyclopedia

Belial is a name for an evil power in the Jewish and Christian traditions — originally not a name at all but a Hebrew common noun, bĕliyyaʿal, meaning roughly worthlessness, ruin, or wickedness. In the older layers of the Hebrew Bible the word is abstract. The construct phrase son of bĕliyyaʿal, or man of bĕliyyaʿal, is an idiom for a scoundrel — the term carrying no implication of a distinct being behind the noun, no more than the English good-for-nothing implies a personified Nothing. The men who incite a town to apostasy in Deuteronomy, the predatory sons of Eli the priest at Shiloh, the churlish Nabal whose own household concedes the name fits him, the hired false witnesses who perjure Naboth to his death, the rapists of Gibeah: these are bĕliyyaʿal people, lawless and beyond the social bond. What happened to the word over the following centuries is a small case study in how a quality becomes a person — and, for the communities that lived inside the resulting cosmology, how a name disclosed a power that had been at work all along.

A cave at Qumran, near the northwest shore of the Dead Sea, where the community’s scrolls were found — the library in which the word bĕliyyaʿal became the proper name Belial. — Peter van der Sluijs, via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 3.0)

A word and its etymology

The grammar of bĕliyyaʿal was already uncertain to its ancient readers, and the uncertainty has propagated into modern scholarship. The most widely accepted derivation parses the term as bĕlî, without, joined to a noun from the root yʿl, to profit or to be of worth — yielding something close to without-worth, a good-for-nothing. A second proposal, associated with a rabbinic reading and adopted by Jerome, splits it as bĕlî ʿōl, without yoke — the one who has thrown off the yoke of Heaven, a moralizing etymology that later commentators have judged contrary to Hebrew philology. A third line, less intuitive but textually suggestive, connects the word to the underworld: parsed from bālaʿ, to swallow, or read against the parallelism of the Psalms, bĕliyyaʿal names the engulfing power of death itself. In the thanksgiving song preserved twice in scripture — at 2 Samuel 22 and again as Psalm 18 — the singer is encircled by the cords of death, the torrents of bĕliyyaʿal, the cords of Sheol, the snares of death. Here the term stands in poetic apposition to death, Sheol, and the deep; the nineteenth-century critic T. K. Cheyne read it simply as the abyss. Whatever the original grammar, this last usage matters: before bĕliyyaʿal was ever the name of a prince, it could already gesture at a swallowing, chaotic underworld — a netherward pull, not merely a moral failing. The road from worthlessness to a personal adversary runs through that ambiguity.

Personification at Qumran

By the last centuries before the Common Era the term had been personified, and nowhere more fully than in the sectarian library recovered near the northwest shore of the Dead Sea — the writings of the community usually identified with the Essenes. There Belial is no longer a quality but a proper name: the prince of an empire of darkness, ranged against God and the sons of light, commanding lesser spirits and snaring the righteous through what the texts call the dominion of Belial. The figure does real theological work. The community read its own embattled situation through a cosmos split between two opposed powers and the lots assigned to each — a structured dualism characteristic of one strand of Second Temple Judaism. In the great discourse of the two spirits in the Community Rule, God appoints over humanity a Prince of Lights and an Angel of Darkness; every person walks, for the duration of an allotted age, under one dominion or the other. Belial is the head of the adversary lot — less a tempter, in this picture, than a wartime sovereign whose reign over the present age is fixed and whose defeat is already scheduled.

The Qumran texts give this sovereignty concrete and recurring form. The War Scroll, the manual of the eschatological battle of the sons of light against the sons of darkness, casts Belial as the commander of the hostile host; preserved in a square Herodian hand and dated to the turn of the era, it scripts a forty-nine-year war that ends with Belial’s lot cast down and the Temple restored.

A portion of the War Scroll (1QM), the manual of the war of the sons of light against the sons of darkness, in which Belial commands the hostile host. — G. Eric and Edith Matson Photograph Collection, Library of Congress, via Wikimedia Commons (public domain)

The Damascus Document warns that in the present, evil age Belial is let loose against Israel, in its phrase, and spreads three snares — fornication, wealth, and the defilement of the sanctuary — which it calls the three nets of Belial, an indictment of the wider Jewish society from which the community had separated. The Thanksgiving Hymns speak of the torrents of Belial overwhelming the psalmist; the blessings-and-curses liturgy curses the men of Belial’s lot; and a related figure, an angelic prince of evil named in some scrolls as the counterpart of the Prince of Light, stands at the dark pole of the same opposed pair. Across these documents Belial is the organizing name for the whole adversary side of a bifurcated reality: a personal will at the head of all the spirits of his lot, and the measure of an age that the community believed it was living through and would outlast. The scholarship of the Dead Sea Scrolls treats this as the decisive moment in the word’s career — the point at which bĕliyyaʿal the noun became Belial the being. The community did not describe it that way. For them the name simply named what was there.

Beliar and the apocalyptic enemy

The Greek-speaking Jewish world inherited the name in the spelling Beliar — a shift of the final consonant common in the transliteration. In the pseudepigrapha gathered around the turn of the era the figure grows steadily more articulated, and steadily more like a single great opponent of God. In the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Beliar is the spirit set against the Lord, the source of the warring impulses in the human heart, the power the patriarchs exhort their sons to flee; the Testaments look forward to a day when the Most High will bind Beliar and trample the hostile spirits. In the Book of Jubilees the same dark office is filled by a prince of demons, the accuser who tempts and afflicts. In the apocalypse literature the portrait sharpens further: Beliar becomes a spirit of lawlessness and, increasingly, an end-time deceiver — a counterfeit who works false signs and wonders to lead the world astray before the final reckoning. The Ascension of Isaiah pictures Beliar descending in human form as a murderous, god-claiming king, identified with a returning persecutor of the saints, to be destroyed at the coming of the Beloved. The Sibylline Oracles cast Beliar as a wonder-working false redeemer raising the dead and seducing the nations. These are tradition-internal pictures, attributed to the texts that hold them, and they do not all agree on detail; what they share is the use of the old word as the title of one adversary, and the expectation that his apparent power belongs to a passing age. The same milieu produced the watcher-and-fallen-angel narratives of the Book of Enoch, and although Belial is not the chief of the watchers there, the Enochic vision of a corrupted cosmos under rebel powers is the wider imaginative weather in which Beliar’s career as arch-deceiver took shape.

The name then crosses, just barely, into the New Testament. It appears exactly once, in the second letter to the Corinthians, where Paul the Apostle presses a series of rhetorical oppositions — light and darkness, the temple of God and idols — and asks what concord Christ has with Beliar (2 Corinthians 6:15). The verse takes the name for granted: it needs no gloss, which means the Greek-speaking congregations already knew Beliar as a near-synonym for the satanic, a fixed counter-pole to Christ. That single appearance carried the name forward into Christianity, where it survived as one of the proper names of the great enemy. The continuity here is genuine — the Pauline Beliar is recognizably the Qumran Belial, the adversary-prince of the dualistic imagination — and it is also the high-water mark of the name’s biblical standing. After Paul, Belial recedes in mainstream Christian usage behind the more dominant vocabulary of Satan and the devil, surviving as a learned synonym, a poet’s word, a name invoked when an author wanted the gravity of the old apocalyptic enemy.

The grimoire king

Much later, and along a different track, the name re-entered Western Europe through the demonology of the medieval and early-modern magical handbooks — the systematic catalogs of named spirits, each assigned a rank, an office, and a sphere of action. Here Belial is enrolled not as an abstract principle but as a particular demon: one of the named kings or princes of an infernal hierarchy modeled on an earthly court. In the catalog tradition that runs from the demon-lists of the sixteenth century into the compilation later printed as a Lesser Key of Solomon, Belial is the sixty-eighth spirit, a mighty and powerful king said to have been created immediately after the first of the fallen, appearing in the form of two beautiful angels seated in a chariot of fire; his office is to distribute dignities and senatorships and to procure the favor of friends and foes, and he governs a host reckoned at some scores of legions — eighty in the most familiar recension, fewer in others, the discrepancy itself a token of how loosely the numbers were transmitted.

The texture of this material is wholly unlike the scriptural and apocalyptic layers. It is bureaucratic where they are cosmic: a named office, a fixed appearance, a legion count, a place in a numbered list. The continuity with the biblical Belial is mostly the name itself, read back out of scripture into a catalog the way the grimoire compilers read every scattered demonic name into their hierarchies — Beelzebub, Asmodeus, and the rest enrolled alongside him. The office and the conventions of the magical literature belong to that literature, not to the prince of the War Scroll. What the grimoire preserved was the prestige of an ancient name; what it added was an order, a face, and a function. The handbooks’ Belial is the same word at the end of a very long road, fitted out for an entirely different kind of work.

How the name traveled

Scholarship treats the whole arc as a development rather than a discovery — the gradual reification of an abstract noun into a personal adversary, driven by the dualism that ran strong in Second Temple Judaism and passed from there into early Christianity. The standard reference treatments — the Belial entry in the Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, the Dead Sea Scrolls studies that map the figure across the sectarian corpus — describe a semantic drift that can be dated and staged: abstract noun in the older biblical layers, poetic near-synonym for the underworld in the Psalms, a proper name and sovereign of the dark lot at Qumran, the Greek Beliar of the pseudepigrapha and of Paul, and at last the catalogd king of the grimoires. Each register can be held apart from the next; the line connecting them is the word.

The traditions that used the name did not experience it as a development. They spoke of Belial as something real and present — a power to be resisted now and defeated later, the head of an opposed lot under whose dominion the present age unfolded. The two descriptions are not rivals. One tracks the history of a word across documents; the other reports what the communities holding those documents took themselves to be facing. Between the two, the same four syllables do very different work. The word for worthlessness had become the name of an enemy.

Research and sources

The primary evidence for Belial’s transformation is distributed across three corpora that can be consulted directly. The personified Belial of the Qumran community is read first in the great sectarian scrolls; the Israel Museum’s Digital Dead Sea Scrolls presents the War Scroll (1QM) — the manual of the war of the sons of light against the sons of darkness — in high-resolution imagery with translation, the document in which Belial commands the hostile host. The Greek Beliar of the pseudepigrapha is gathered in R. H. Charles’s landmark two-volume critical edition, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913), whose second volume contains the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Jubilees, the Ascension of Isaiah, and the Sibylline Oracles — the texts in which Beliar becomes the spirit of lawlessness and end-time deceiver; Charles’s translation of the Testaments remained the standard English access to the figure for most of the twentieth century.

For the modern critical synthesis, the entry on Belial in the Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (edited by Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst; 2nd revised edition, Leiden: Brill, 1999) is the standard scholarly point of departure, setting the etymological debate and the biblical occurrences against the Second Temple personification. On the Qumran material specifically, Kenneth Atkinson’s study of the three nets of Belial argues that the Damascus Document’s triad of snares — fornication, wealth, and the defilement of the sanctuary — reflects a pre-Qumran tradition, an example of how closely the figure was bound to the community’s social self-definition. The demonological afterlife is documented in the early-modern handbook tradition; the catalogd king, with his office, is set out in the nineteenth-century edition of the Goetia, where Belial appears as the sixty-eighth of the listed spirits — the latest stratum of a name whose biblical and apocalyptic life had ended more than a millennium before.

→ Related: Zephaniah · Gnosis · Second Temple Judaism · Dualism · New Testament · Christianity · Paul The Apostle · Old Testament · Demonology · Demon · Essenes · Book Of Enoch · Beelzebub · Lucifer · Apocalypse