Given the bad decisions that lots of otherwise-sensible people make, it wouldn’t be all that surprising for demons to make a bad decision in the heat of the moment.
4 Likes
I think @Paraleptopecten may be correct. The demons could make boneheaded decision if presented with the Son of God. The gods often do dumb things. They were not omni-beings. Angels or demons much more so. That ending may have been a mercy. So I see nothing wrong narrative wise with the demons doing something like that. But I think this particular story has a lot more going on.
Same. It’s an issue that is overdue for me to seriously ponder.
I was thinking the same thing. Other demons know he was from Nazareth in Mark! Jesus also says he casts out demons. But I don’t think it’s only the conversational pieces but the sheer number of exorcisms throughout the synoptic gospels and Jesus saying things like “this kind can only come out by prayer.” If we are completely dismissing all exorcisms we are dismissing many passages that claim to be the words and deeds of Jesus.
Is it not possible there is an underlying spiritual reality and that demon possession can be real? Do we have to completely rule out all demon possession? Do we think of mute or mentally ill people today as demon possessed? Definitely Italy not easy questions.
I think the pig story is humorous to be honest and one of the reasons I came back to the idea that Mark could be written by a Jewish Christian. Given that it explains Jewish customs we know it at least has Gentiles in mind as an audience. But the scene with the pigs is comical to a degree. These quotes are from a Bible study lesson I ran a while back:
Meier: “It is scarcely accidental that Mark places this pericope dealing with Gentile faith directly after a nullification of the Jewish food laws. Both issues were the focal point of sharp and dividing controversy in the early church. As Meier puts it, “having declared all foods clean (and therefore having torn down a major barrier between Jews and Gentiles in 7:19), the Marcan Jesus now passes through various Gentile regions, bringing healing and food (symbolically, the salvation proclaimed by the gospel) to the pagans and thus foreshadowing the Christian mission.” (MJ, VII, p. 712)
The core story itself stems from a Jewish Milieu
Most scholars have picked up on a common theme in this incidence.
Mary Healy writes: The territory of the Gerasenes, on the east side of the Sea of Galilee would have been an eerie place even in daylight. To this day numerous caves dot the shoreline, many of which were used to bury the dead. Then as now, tombs were popularly regarded as a favorite haunt of demons. The lifestyle and customs of this Gentile region would have seemed alien to Jews, since the inhabitants did not observe the Jewish moral or dietary laws. Indeed, this particular vicinity would be viewed as doubly unclean, containing as it did both tombs (see Num 5:2) and pigs (see Lev 11:7). As Jesus steps ashore, he is immediately challenged by the demonic powers that seem to hold sway in the area, as if they are jealous of their territorial rights. [1]
Bock (ibid) writes: “In fact, there are three layers of uncleanness: the demons, death, and the pigs. Everything about this scene would make Jewish readers squeamish, and the man is likely a Gentile, not an expectant candidate for one ministering Jewish hope.”
Joel Marcus writes, ”In its present form, for example, the story is generally positive about non-Jews; the Gentile demoniac whom Jesus delivers from his affliction ends up becoming a missionary of sorts and proclaiming what Jesus has done for him throughout the predominantly pagan region of the Decapolis, causing everyone there to be amazed. Some of the story’s elements, however, seem to reflect an origin in a chauvinistic Jewish environment; it implicitly links unclean spirits with what are for Jews unclean places (graveyards), unclean people (Gentiles), and unclean animals (pigs), and it describes with relish the death of the latter.”[2]
Robert Stein summarizes the issue succinctly: “Thus the unclean spirits dwelling in the unclean man living in the unclean tombs enter the unclean swine.”[3]
[1] Mary Healy, The Gospel of Mark, Baker Academic pg 98…
[2] Joel Marcus, Mark Vol 1 pg 347, Anchor Bible Commentary
[3] Robert Stein, Baker Exegetical Commentary on Mark pg 256
So I am definitely seeing the “Jewish chauvinism” mentioned by Joel Marcus. How historical this scene is belongs to another matter. Then there is the question of “Legion” and Mark’s date. But it’s difficult to deny the overwhelming evidence of the Gospels that Jesus exorcised demons. It also leads to the problem of why so many people are possessed by demons.
Most people are not going to be left with a comfortable view of the gospels and scratching their heads wondering why they should trust the rest if Jesus was not a genuine exorcist.
Vinnie
3 Likes
I came across the idea that Paul is talking about Jewish astrology, which while not pagan had a lot in common with the Babylonian and Persian versions (which served to bring magi from the east to find Jesus). The idea of Jewish astrology had nothing to do with horoscopes, rather it had to do with the idea that God announces major moves in the heavens. Dr. Michael Heiser seems to hold to this as well; he’s got perhaps the best brief explanation tied to what John says in Revelation 12.
A friend of mine in grad school worked at a mental hospital in New Jersey for two summers. After the second summer he told some of us that the hospital director, who was an atheist, had shared that he believed in demons because there were patients with “alters” that knew things there was no way the patients could know, including speaking languages they had never learned. Add that to a couple of experiences I’ve had and I’d say that demons are still around.
I second that!
= - = + = - = † = - = + = - =
See above.
The greatest ones are bound, as Peter notes, in Tartarus, waiting for their final judgment. That’s actually who Jesus went and preached to “in prison”, to tell them no, He wasn’t stuck in the realm of the dead with them, and no, they weren’t getting another chance.
3 Likes
That is sort of a “show stopper”, isn’t it? The Mammon thing can be understood allegorically and thus spiritually, but talking to demons is a whole different thing.
Then there’s the fact that Acts reports that Paul cast out demons, too.
I have to agree.
2 Likes
I am never going to be able to listen to that song again without thinking of demons!
Like instead of taking care of the nations Yahweh assigned them rebelling instead and seeking worship for themselves.
That one struck me as kind of freaky when we first came to it when translating Mark.
We derailed an entire class session on that one in NT Greek readings!
I find the most interesting phrase to be the bit about tormenting them “before the time”. This is a reference to the final judgment which they know is coming; if Yahweh locked away the elohim/gods of the nations and sentenced them to die like men, the demons would have grasped that they weren’t going to avoid punishment, either.
I recall a discussion about demon possession (I think it was at an InterVarsity Christian Fellowship Bible study) where someone suggested that if there are X number of demons, then demon possession would have become more and more rare over time as the world population increased, so the greater frequency of possession in Jesus’ time on earth makes sense.
3 Likes
The above, and this is not meant to be mean, just the reality, is something I just don’t believe. I think it’s lies and I’ve heard it thousands of times and no one can ever prove it. Just stories. I’ve heard stories of Bigfoot and aliens too. Pastors healing crippled kids and so on. Then no follow ups.
It is a common belief that there are no demon-possessed people today. That would be good if it would be true. It seems it is not true, although people may label mental disorders wrongly as being caused by demons.
Here, most(?) priests of the Lutheran church were very sceptical about demons possessing people. That has changed, possibly because the country has moved towards being openly ‘post-Christian’. There are growing numbers of people involved in occult and movements that could be classified as worship of idols. Priests around the country have started to report cases where they think demons are involved.
Two persons within the Lutheran church have been given a permission to act as exorcists. They seem to have a healthy attitude and procedures. They start by assuming that the ‘patients’ have mental problems. If that assumption seems to be true, they send the persons to psychiatrists. Also potential physical problems and complications are checked. Only if none of the ‘natural’ reasons seem to explain the state, they start to handle the ‘patient’ as a potential victim of demons.
They have developed procedures where the ‘treatment’ is more like ‘ordinary’ prayers than movie-type exorcism. It resembles a small-group prayer meeting of believers, rather than exorcisms. It involves reading of Bible, the Lord’s prayer, etc. They tell that if the person is possessed, it manifests at some point of the prayers. When it has manifested, they command the unclean spirit to leave. That has brought immediate help to at least some persons (I don’t know numbers or details).
The reason why there is an attempt to keep the exorcisms out of publicity is that the reactions are not positive. This ‘modern’ society does not believe that demons exist, so the exorcisms are interpreted as something harmful. Especially psychiatrists give negative statements about the activity, without knowing much of the cases and procedures.
2 Likes
I’m not fond of “this biblical evidence is real but there is no or extremely little evidence of it today because….”. The alarm bells are waking up the skeptic in me. It is either real or not. If demon possession is real I doubt we have any way of knowing how many demon possessions still occur and if there can be underlying spiritual warfare influencing physical medical conditions in a fallen world. We are over-reaching. We can trust Jesus on this or not.
The Synoptics make this a primary activity of Jesus. From the Gospel coalition.
The data gathered from the four major Synoptic accounts and several minor references that describe the symptoms of “demon possession” and exorcism should not be viewed as exhaustive in nature since the summary statements and passages make it clear that exorcism was a regular feature of Jesus’ ministry and, ultimately, the ministry of his disciples (Matt. 4:23-25; 8:16-17; 10:1, 5-8; Mark 1:21-34, 39; 3:9-12; 6:6b-7, 12-13; Luke 4:31-41; 6:17-19; 7:21; 9:1-2, 6). In fact this ministry, along with teaching, preaching and healing, together made up the four major aspects of Jesus’ ministry.
This is part of why conservatives hold on to their literalism so strongly. Once the camel’s nose is in the tent, the rest is soon to follow. How much can we chip away in the name of accommodation before there is nothing left? They know that once they give in on early Genesis, a lot of the rest of the Bible is in trouble.
Not an easy question. I wish more people here would chime in.
Vinnie
Wait, what? The comment was about how many people may get possessed, and I related a mathematical observation about it. Why should some simple math “wake up the skeptic”? The only reason that observation wouldn’t be true would be if you think there are billions of demons so that there are more of them than of human beings.
You are anyway – you’re reading into a simple statement of math stuff that isn’t there.
That would be an incorrect assumption: after Genesis 1 - 11 there is far less myth or mythologized history, so very little “of the rest of the Bible” would be in trouble at all.
BTW, I wouldn’t call literalists conservative; a conservative would be one who claims no more for the text than it claims itself, and imposing literalism is claiming more than the text does.
2 Likes
That is not really correct. Critical scholarship shows there is plenty of myth throughout the rest of the Bible. Daniel, Moses, the Exodus, all the patriarchs etc… Maybe the stories as they stand (usually in two contradictory forms) are mostly myth, maybe mostly historical; maybe something in between. At the end we have story and narrative. Much of it has no concerns with history in the modern sense. It’s really more faith propaganda than history. Even with Jesus we have four visions (with a lot of overlap) but they are not amalgams or just supplement less full earlier narratives. Replacements is probably a more correct term. It wrong to harmonize them.
But anyways, my comment about the camel was more for those who deny Jesus was an actual exorcist. I’m not sure how you plan on selling that to a conservative when you can’t convince them Genesis 1-11 is not a concordant description of reality. And if you are going to tell them that, I really can’t fault them for dismissing everything someone has to say out of hand.
I would. The shoe fits to me.
You don’t know how many demons there are.
You don’t know how many demons go to earth to possess people.
You don’t know that a greater population means greater numbers of demons would spend time on earth (you are arguing the opposite).
You don’t know how many possessions today there are or if there is some underlying spiritual reality to physical defects.
Demon possession seems to be a pretty common occurrence per the gospels witnesses. You seem to be apologizing for why it might not be (or isn’t) as common today. But you don’t know that it isn’t. This is just drinking the secular kool aid. I’m going to believe in demon possession as the gospels describe or not. I am not going to soften it for some middle position based on stuff I can’t possibly know.
That Jesus was viewed as an exorcist and worked these types of miracles, is as certain as it is that he spoke in parables.
We can certainly say the human Jesus didn’t know better and thought he was curing demons when in fact he was healing medical illnesses and believe all the conversations between demons are made up. Most Christians would not be comfortable with that. But there are clearly limits to Jesus’s knowledge in the gospels so it is at least in the realm of Christian possibility. Jesus may have mistakenly believed Moses authored the Pentateuch as well. Somehow though, the performing exorcisms that aren’t real and being so wrong about a spiritual aspect of existence is vastly more troubling to me than a question of who wrote a book.
Great question… I don’t know. I do struggle about that, but the description fits so strongly in my experience with treating epilepsy and schizophrenia, as well as some reports of possession in Africa (bori), that it appears to me to fit medical and psychological (maybe dissociative) illnesses. Also, it seems to me that God’s accommodation to the creation story is not that far away as a stretch. Paul uses ancient science in other areas of the NT, too…such as using a the three tiered universe (all should confess that Jesus is Lord, in heaven, on Earth, and under the earth).
To me, in a way, the drive to get rid of a spirit by prayer implied that this particular case was possibly more of an emotional illness, than schizophrenia or epilepsy. Jesus may be explaining what they can accept.
I’m not saying that demons or possession don’t exist; but I have a hard time with that in these cases.
Finally, I hear the argument that we would not accept the melding of myth and faith…I, too, struggle here. However, it reminds me of the struggle our YEC brothers and sisters have. It is not easy. I am not sure.
I struggle accepting what seems to me to be a nebulous assertion from Paul that he, and his contemporaries, could tell God’s characteristics from nature when he is mistaken elsewhere. I don’t really know…thank you for your very good thoughts.
I do think Jesus learned as he grew …but I don’t know how much.
There is so much to learn from the New Testament. Merry Christmas!
Addendum: Randal Rauser has reviewed Romans 1:20 extensively, as well. It’s interesting to read his thoughts.
Does Paul’s Epistle to the Romans Imply There are no Actual Atheists? - Randal Rauser
I appreciate your thoughts.
Thanks
I find myself so often on these forums dissagreeing however this is such a wonderful post. Anything i tried to add would only detract from it…thank you Craig.
I haven’t read craigs response, however, here is mine…
There is i think a difference between the heavens declaring the glory of God and sinful mortal men, through fallible interpretation, claiming that satan has not corrupted what we do see. These same men make the claim that God allowing this is a God of lies. That simply isnt biblically adequate. The bible plainly tells us that all created beings with the ability to reason have free will…including Satan. As such im comfortable with the idea that reasoned beings can intentionally manipulate the witness of God. I recognize that this may also be applied to the bible, however, i also believe we can internally test the consistency of bible writers and writings against each other. However, in secular scientific interpretations, that same internal testing shows up many inconsistencies that are highly problematic and despite any claims to the contrary, often result in the acknowledgment “we do not know the answer to that yet”.
What i choose to do is to focus on evidence that is harmonious with both the bible and reality and i do this because it passes first the internally tested biblical narrative AND what i see around me.
I therefore place the entirety of my witness first on total inerrancy of all scripture AND, on a reading of scripture according to the ways in which it internally tells us its various parts are written and should be read. The bible plainly tells us how and when to apply various literary techniques…we know through the normal use of language when something is literal and when its not. The only time we wont know that, is when we straw pluck unreferenced texts (by that i mean ignoring passage context and not using concordance cross-referencing)
If we choose to straw pluck, we could easily align our worldview with that of Adolf Hitler…which on the surface appears perfectly fine. The reality however was very different as history proves.
“I pledge that I never will tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity … We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit” Adolf Hitler The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872
I think another example of straw plucking are Islamic extremists who use the koran to supposedly support the killing of infidels in Islamic jihad wars.
These are the problems/consequences associated with unsound theology driven by poor cross-referencing habits.
So your foundation is an idea that isn’t found in scripture.
But it rarely does that.
No it doesn’t – there’s not a single place where the scriptures announce what kind of literature is being used except in the case of some Psalms.
Nope. All you have to do to know this is not true is to actually read human literature, from ancient Egypt right on through modern novels.
This is long, but it’s well worth listening to the whole thing:
1 Like
Six hours, but it does start out well. I’m looking forward to it. Thanks.
Im going to ignore the above…its trifle without scholarly referencing.
You sidestepped the internall test… below are some examples where we can know theology and doctrine via internal testing…
The most famous examples i can think of right now:
The incarnation and cross (God taking on himself the form of man and dying in order to save His people from their sins)
The Flood
The Gospel and grace (grace starts in Genesis, the noah found favour at the time of the flood, Abraham…etc)
70 week prophcy in Daniel (aligns with Rev12 and 13)
The Second Coming of Christ (doctrine of redemption and restoration)
Tell me im wrong…and whilst contemplating that, perhaps read Dominion, The making of the Western Mind by Tom Holland
It doesn’t need “scholarly reference”, it’s foundational to scholarship.
I didn’t sidestep anything – if you haven’t asked the right questions, nothing you claim can be counted on to be useful. And you have determinedly refused to ask the right questions, starting with “What is scripture?”
Old news; he’s just re-doing what was taught back when I was in grad school.
Again, no referencing, just trifle that you come up with…btw, i have no reason to believe you ever went to grad school! That is not evidence to support your view.
Agin, you did not answer the internal tests i presented. Refute the tests.
And you do not understand the point of my suggesting you read Dominion…below is an excerpt from the the book
The surprise, then, is less that we should have so few detailed descriptions in ancient literature of what a crucifixion might actually involve, than that we should have any at all.* The corpses of the crucified, once they had first provided pickings for hungry birds, tended to be flung into a common grave. In Italy, undertakers dressed in red, ringing bells as they went, would drag them there on hooks. Oblivion, like the loose earth scattered over their tortured bodies, would then entomb them. This was a part of their fate. Nevertheless, amid the general silence, there is one major exception which proves the rule
The point is, if we take your view, we would form the opinion that Christs cucifixion must be non literal. The bible goes against the norm and states Christ was buried in a tomb when the historical record shows criminals were left to rot then eventuelly tossed into mass graves!
Randall Rauser’s Conclusion:
It is plausible that Paul’s epistle does not support the idea that everybody knows God exists. Rather, it supports the weaker claim that people who take for granted that some sort of deity exists must have known at some point that their gods were false (and therefore that Paul’s God is true) and, more importantly, that the knowledge in question was not retained due to continual suppression and darkening of the heart.
Rauser’s article is excellent and enlightening. However, I would argue that all people at some point know that a deity exists, and then did not retain it “due to continual suppression and darkening of the heart.
Justin L Barrett, developmental psychologist and anthropologist, in his book Born Believers, the Science of Children’s Religious Belief, (which I in my library and have browsed through, not read), argues that it is very rare to find a person who never believed. Here is a quote from one of the reviewers: “A fascinating and readable account of why religious beliefs are perfectly normal and virtually universal. In an age of atheism, this book will challenge widespread assumptions that nonbelief is the default and that children must be indoctrinated to believe. Jam-packed with insight and wit, Born Believers should be required reading for all parents and for anyone else interested in the spiritual lives of children.” (Robert A. Emmons, Professor of Psychology, University of California, Davis and Past-President, American Psychological Association’s Division of the Psychology of Religion )
Many commentators hold a different view. I will just quote one from Holman’s The Apologetics Study Bible.
Contrary to what some critics claim, this description does not reflect an outdated cosmology or view of universal reality. Jesus’ lordship is comprehensive–over all personal beings in heaven (spiritual beings), on earth (living human beings), and under the earth (the dead awaiting resurrection).
I am curious as to where you find Paul to be mistaken. If Paul was writing under the direction of the Holy Spirit, how could that be?
Luke 2:52 And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man. I don’t fully understand this either. But it seems that Jesus, in human form, had limited knowledge, but even then, as he always spoke with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, what he spoke was always truth. As with you, I am sure I don’t have a complete understanding of this issue.
There are many times when a condition is not demonic. Perhaps at times it can be both psychological and demonic. But when we read of the demoniacs in Matthew 8, how could that not be demonic, with the demons asking to be embodied in the pigs, and then the pigs rushing into the sea and drowning? I believe that when Jesus spoke of demon possession, it was actual demon possession, not an accommodation to the ignorance of the people he was speaking to (if indeed they were as ignorant as we would like to believe.)
Thanks too for your thoughts. We did have a wonderful Christmas with family and friends–I trust you Christmas was also good.
2 Likes
Thank you for your encouragement.
Here are some of my responses:
We certainly see God working in the processes of nature. And as previously stated, one cannot see God working in whales descending from other creatures when they did not. There is a good series of three videos on whale evolution from the Discovery Institute, the initial one and counters to the counter claims.
Yes, if the Bible is not inerrant, then we are left to individually decide what in the Bible is true, and what is not, and to doubt just about anything scripture teaches us. If it is not inerrant, then what in the Bible can we trust or not trust?
Way off topic, but the history behind Mohammed and the Koran is quite interesting. Maybe none of the accepted historical narrative is true and there was no Mecca or Mohammed at the time claimed, and the Koran is partly plagiarized from early Christian writings:
The Bible Unfiltered:
Yes, six hours! Maybe I will listen to a little and see if it grabs me.
1 Like