Is demon possession a spiritual reality in our time? On the one hand, we hear all kinds of stories of demonic activity, including “eye-witness” accounts of demon possessed people, read books on the subject, and hear sermons in which the “reality” of demon possession is declared. On the other hand, when we look into Scripture, we find something entirely different from what we hear. Does the Bible contain stories of demon-possession? Most certainly. Does Scripture give us clear guidance on how to deal with demon possessed people. Actually, no. All we have are narratives in which, for the most part, Jesus confronted and freed demon possessed individuals.
A most obvious and important fact is where the Bible talks about demon-possession: only in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke). Two texts in Acts, in which demon-possession is a possibility, will be discussed later. No accounts are given in the OT of demon-possession nor in any other text in the NT. The Greek word for “demon possessed” is daimonidzomai. Other than one occurrence in John (10.21, in which context Jesus has been accused of “having a demon”), all occurrences of the term “demon possessed” are found in the Synoptics.
The word for demon/devil is daimonion. This particular word can be translated as demon, devil or god. In the Greek translation of the OT, known as the Septuagint (LXX), the word is translated as demons (Deut. 32.17), gods (Psa. 95.1), shaggy goats (Isa. 13.21; 34.14), altar, Fortune (Isa. 65.11), and devastation (Psa. 90.6). In the NT, typically, this word is translated demon or devil. Outside the Synoptics, the word daimonion is found in John, 1 Corinthians and Revelation. In John, in every occurrence, the Jews are accusing Jesus of “having” a demon (in John 8.49, Jesus said, “I do not have a demon.”). In 1 Corinthians 10.20-21, Paul is referring to “things sacrificed to demons,” or idols. The word is used descriptively in Revelation in three places. Once, a form of the word daimonion occurs in James 2.19.
We then can conclude the NT theology of demon possession is rooted solely in the Synoptic Gospels. Now, some will suggest cases of demon possession are found in Acts. In Acts, an unusual situation exists. The Greek verb daimonidzomai does not occur in Acts. In Acts, the word used is pneumatos, spirit. Two cases of note are found in Acts. First, in 16.16-18, the account of the slave-girl with the spirit of divination occurs. Second, the case of the Seven sons of Sceva in 19.11-20 is accounted. These two narratives teach some important truths about demon possession.
Acts is the second part of what many believe was to have been a three-part work by Luke. Part One is, of course, the Book of Luke. No one knows if Luke ever wrote Part Three. We do have Parts One and Two, and, so, can make some observations and conclusions about the words Luke used in these two treatises. First of all, Luke was consistent in his use of the terms daimonion and daimonidzomai. Clearly, in both Luke and Acts, when the writer used either term, the intended meaning was always demon, except in Acts, where the term is rightly understood as “foreign gods” (xenōn daimoniōn). In Luke, the term is always demon(s).
One verse in Luke is of particular importance in understanding how Luke used the terms daimonion and pneumatos. In Luke 8.2, the writer said some who were with Jesus included “some women who had been healed of evil spirits and sicknesses: Mary who was called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out.” My position is Luke meant one thing by “evil spirits,” and another with “demons.” What had afflicted the women, evil spirits, was not the same as the “seven demons” who had gone out of Mary Magdalene. In Luke, as in other places, spirit referred, in places, to one’s inner being (“Blessed are the poor in spirit,” [Matt. 5.3]; “the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak,” [Matt. 26.41]; “Jesus . . . yielded up his spirit,” [Matt. 27.50]; “and her spirit returned, and she got up immediately,” [Lk. 8.55]; et alia).
In some cases, Luke did use the term pneumatos in such a way as to suggest a kind of demon possession or oppression. In Luke 4.33, a man is described who had a “spirit of an unclean demon.” Jesus rebuked the demon and he came out of the man. Here, the word “spirit” is controlled, or defined, by the term demon. The essence, or spirit, of the demon was uncleanness. In 8.26-33, a man is described as being “possessed with demons,” their name being Legion, “for many demons had entered him.” In v. 29, Jesus “commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man.” Luke switched between demons (plural) and spirit (singular). Again, demons define spirit. The essence of the “many demons” was uncleanness. The many demons were all unclean, and, thus, the man was possessed with a spirit, or essence, of evil.
In 9.37-42, a distinct and clear connection is made between spirit and demon. In this context, the words appear to be synonymous. Yet, we can argue with some justification spirit means something different from demon. When the boy, who was demon possessed, was overcome by “a spirit,” he would scream, go into a convulsion and foam at the mouth. The “spirit” was not overcome easily. Here, the “spirit” could be an essential condition brought on by the demon. For, the demon “slammed” the boy into the ground and “threw him into a convulsion.” Jesus rebuked the “unclean spirit, and healed the boy.” Jesus cured the boy of his condition by casting out the demon.
On the other hand, in this narrative, the evil spirit and the demon could be synonymous terms. Even if they are synonymous, spirit still refers to the boys deep, inner condition. We even could conclude the boy was afflicted with a kind of schizophrenia brought on by the demon. Should we infer all schizophrenia is demonically induced. Absolutely not. Schizophrenia is a mental disorder or disease and is a condition resulting ultimately from the fallen state of man and nature. We would be foolish to conclude mental and physical diseases are the result of demonic activity or the work of the Devil. Disease is a fact of life.
No doubt, in 11.24-26, Jesus was referring to demons when he used the term spirit. Of importance, though, in understanding Luke’s use of the term spirit is how he always modified the term with unclean and evil. Demons, in essence, are spirit beings. As with their master Satan, they are locked in time just as human beings are. They are confined to this world and are bound by time and space. Neither the Devil nor demons can be at all places at all times. The Devil is not omnipresent, omniscient or omnipotent. He does not know everything, cannot do anything he wants to do, nor is he everywhere all at once.
In 13.10-17, Luke described a woman who, because of a spirit, had been sick for eighteen years. When Jesus healed her, he did not cast out the spirit or a demon. What he did say was she had been bound by Satan. He did not say Satan caused her illness, he said only she had been bound by him. We can conclude she was sick because of an inner condition or attitude as justifiably as we could conclude here disease was a result of demonic activity. We can say with certainty she had somehow been deceived by Satan into believing her disease was incurable. Indeed, with no mention of a demon, we stand on better ground arguing for a disease resulting from believing a lie, which is the one strategy the Devil always employs. He is a Liar and the Father of Lies.
In one final text in Luke, spirit is used. After the resurrection, Jesus appeared to his Disciples. When they first saw him, the Apostles believed they were seeing a spirit, or a ghost. Jesus put that misbegotten idea to rest when he declared, “See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.”
So, then, what about the instances in Acts in which someone had a spirit? First, in 16.16-18, we look at the case of the slave-girl who had a “spirit of divination.” This young woman was a fortune teller. Was her ability to tell someone’s future the result of demonic possession? Luke did not say so. He simply described her as having a spirit of divination. After she had troubled Paul and Barnabas for several days, Paul said to the spirit, “I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And it came out at that very moment.” We do not know the nature of the spirit; we do know the spirit, or inner condition, gave the girl the ability to tell fortunes.
Since Luke wrote Acts, we would expect him to say a person was demon possessed if they were, as he did in his Gospel. When he had described demon possessed persons in the Gospel of Luke, and used the term spirit in that context, he always described the spirit as unclean or evil. He did not do that in describing the slave-girl. Further, when using spirit in a context in which demon possession was evident, he used the word demon, not just spirit by itself. (cf. Lk. 13.10-16 - demon is not used in this passage; in 4.3, 8.26-31, 9.37-42 and 11.17-26, demon and spirit are used together).
In Acts 19.11-20, the use of evil spirit seems to be a synonym for demon. In this text, Luke modified the term spirit with evil. The essence of the spirit being described was evil. The point of this narrative, though, is not to establish a demon possession theology. What is at stake, as in so many places in Acts, is the credibility of the Gospel. In the situation being described, the Seven sons of Sceva were attempting to case out evil spirits in “the name of the Lord Jesus.” Obviously, these men were not believers. Only a believer, and in this case, only Paul, could cast out evil spirits. Luke wrote, “God was performing extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul.” Paul was not doing miracles, God was through him. He did the extraordinary miracles so the word of the Lord might grow mightily and prevail. If God had allowed the Sons of Sceva to cast out evil spirits while not being believers, the integrity of the Gospel would have been compromised in a critical way.
Following the account of Sceva’s sons, two statements were made. First, “This became known to all, both Jews and Greeks, who lived in Ephesus; and fear fell upon them all and the name of the Lord Jesus was being magnified.” (19.17) Second, “So the word of the Lord was growing mightily and prevailing.” The stories of Apollos, the Disciples of John the Baptist at Ephesus and the Seven Sons of Sceva show the essential truth of the Gospel had been established and its credibility and integrity had been upheld.
No comments:
Post a Comment