Jesus Taught the State is Satanic

Standing from a high peak, Satan showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the world to make a grand bargain: in exchange for his worship, all the kingdoms will be given to Jesus (Luke 4:5-8; c.f. Matthew 4:8-10). Jesus, rejected this offer, but he did not reject the basic premise, that Satan is in fact the ruler of the world.

From the NIV, the exchange reads, "The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. And he said to him, 'I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. If you worship me, it will all be yours.' Jesus answered, 'It is written: 'Worship the Lord your God and serve him only.''"

Admittedly, proof texting this passage to make the case that Satan is the ruler of this world is making an argument from silence, and if that were all that we had, then it would be seemingly disingenuous to make any more of it. However, Satan's rulership is a theme repeated elsewhere in scripture. Jesus makes it clear repeating this sentiment three times in the Gospel of John.

"Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out." John 12:31
"I will not say much more to you, for the prince of this world is coming. He has no hold over me." John 14:30
"When he [the Holy Spirit] comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment: about sin, because people do not believe in me; about righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; and about judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned." John 16:8-11

In each of these cases, the Greek term ἄρχων (archon) is used, which denotes a "ruler." This word has made it into English serving as the root for words such as "monarch" or "anarchy" and is consistently translated as "ruler" to indicate one who has political authority over another.¹ This is the same root used in Mark 10:42 and the parallel in Matthew 20:25 to denote the rulers of the Gentiles (i.e. the Romans).

Furthermore, in 1 John 5:19, the author makes a distinction between Christians as the children of God, and the world which "lies under the control of the evil one." Revelation too stresses this theme, consistently pitting Babylon against God and His people with many commentators understanding Babylon as an allusion to Rome.

Lest one think that the demonic nature of the state is a Johannine innovation, Paul also affirms a similar line of thought. The Epistle to the Ephesians contains a strong emphasis on spiritual warfare: "As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler [archon] of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient" (Ephesians 2:1-2). In fact, Paul later writes that we are to "put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil. 12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers (archas), against the authorities, against the cosmic powers (kosmocrats) over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places." (Ephesians 6:11-12). Paul is alluding to a structure of evil in the rulers of this world that we must oppose.²

In 1 Corinthians 2:6-8, Paul stresses that the "rulers of this age" would not have crucified Jesus if they had understood the wisdom of God exhibited in the crucifixion. Commentators such as Martin Dibelius in his study of Pauline thought, argue that Paul is referring to Satan and the demonic powers in this passage.³ Similarly, in his recent work, Greg Boyd argues that these "powers" were indeed the demonic forces of Pauline theology whom God allowed to self-destruct through their own evil.⁴ Certainly Paul has Pilate and the Roman government in mind, but a broader understanding of the crucifixion and its ultimate triumph over Satan and his dominion completes the passage. Satan's activity was instrumental in getting Jesus crucified in the first place (John 13:27) and is consistent with the repeated lack of understanding exhibited by the demons that Jesus encountered throughout his ministry (e.g. Matthew 8:29; Mark 1:24, 5:7; Luke 4:34).

Oscar Cullman takes Paul's view of the state as expressed elsewhere and applies it to Romans 13:1 arguing that the "authorities" (ἐξουσίαις or exousiais) carries the same connotation of demonic powers.⁵ Paul himself gives us reason to believe that these are to be considered one and the same given the dominance of the imperial cult at this time where sacrifices to Caesar were an oath of fealty to the state and, as Paul writes participation with demons (1 Corinthians 10:20-21).

As Robert Culver notes, we are faced with the "unhappy fact...that national governments are part of Satan's sphere of prevailing influence on earth. They are a sphere of special Satanic activity."⁶ Similarly, John Howard Yoder writes, "there is a very strong strand of Gospel teaching which sees secular government as the province of the sovereignty of Satan."⁷ With this in mind, is it really any surprise that the state has given mankind a long history of warfare, death, and destruction? Or that, as the 20th century demonstrates, the more power a state has, the more blood it sheds? Any biblical theology which ignores this troubling teaching on the state is one unworthy of the name.

The term anarchy is derived from a - which means without, and archon to be ruler, thus being "without a ruler." This stands in contrast to typical phrases which roughly equate anarchy with chaos, which is not supported by its etymology.
Walter Wink's trilogy on Paul's understanding of "the powers" is possibly the best source understanding Paul's view. If you are to read one, read Wink's final entry Engaging the Powers.
See Dibelius' Die Geisterwelt im Glauben des Paulus for additional information.
Boyd, Crucifixion of the Warrior God, 2017 pp. 635, 1056-1057.
Cullman, The State and the New Testament, 1963 p. 72
Culver, [Civil Government], 2000 p. 52
Yoder, The Politics of Jesus, 1994 p. 194