- 10. The question arises: If these contemporary views concerning demons were mistaken, how is it that Jesus appeared to accept them? Why did he not correct them? Assuredly, not because he didn’t know any better. The “kenosis” theory which argues that Christ’s knowledge of “natural philosophy” was not better than that of any man of his time, has only the bad exegesis of a solitary passage (Phil. 2:7) to commend it.
The correct explanation is more likely that Jesus was willing to accept and use these mistaken notions because they were really not so far from the truth as they are sometimes thought to be!
Concerning human affliction the Bible teaches that:
(a) All evil (as distinct from sin) comes from God, whether it be cancer, earthquake or war. Isaiah 45:7. Amos 3:6. Job 1:21. Psalms 107:11-13, 23-29.
(b) God performs His will in the world through the operation of His angels. Job 38 :4-7. Psalms 104:4, and 103:20,21.
(c) Just as here are angels of good sent forth as wholesome controlling influences in the lives of God’s saints (Psalm 34:7, Heb. 1:14), so also there are angels of evil whose special sphere of activity is the control or administration of evil. (Psalm 78 :491RV. Exod., 12 :23. Acts, 12:23. 2 Sam. 24;17. (Isaiah 37:36). Note carefully that these angels of evil are not wicked angels. - 11. In the light of these facts it must be accepted that such afflictions as lunacy, epilepsy, dumbness and deafness, which the gospels attribute to “spirits,” are in fact, the result of angelic operation at the behest of God. Consequently, apart from the fundamental error that these “spirits” were “evil” in the sense that they were the minions of “Beelzebub,” the conception shared by so many of the contemporaries of Jesus was basically sound ; in fact, almost, if not quite, as sound as the (Gnostic) approach of our own generation, which talks incessantly in terms of “laws of nature” and ever-increasing scientific jargon, whereby it effectively blinds itself to the essential truth: God controls all; He is completely Master in His own universe.
What are “laws of nature” but atheistic re-statements of the fact that God’s angels administer His world on uniform consistent principles? 24:17. (Isaiah 37:36). Prominent among these is that of the Gadarene lunatic. Mark 5:1-19 (Par. 5). Here are a few suggestions:
(a) It was part of the man’s delusion, dinned into him in his saner periods by ill-advised and ignorant friends, that he was possessed by a legion of devils: “You! you know what’s wrong with you? You’re possessed by a devil! Not by just one of them, either—by a whole regiment of them !” Hence, his own words : “My name is Legion, for we are many.” And note carefully how the man’s talk swings backward and forward between “I” and “we.”
(b) Observe the good psychology behind the Lord’s approach to the demented man. Just as one would quiet a child in tantrums or violent excitement by putting a simple leading question, so also Jesus here : “What is thy name?” The question focuses the man’s attention on his own sorry state.
(c) Why should Jesus acquiesce in the destruction of two thousand pigs ? To insist that this was a punishment of their Jewish owners for keeping creatures which were Levitically unclean is neither proven nor adequate. The owners may not have been Jews, for this was Galilee of the Gentiles. Or the swine may have been kept by Jewish owners for purposes of trade and not for Jewish consumption. A more convincing approach would be the lack of sympathy for Jesus locally (v.17).
(d) Better still is the assumption that the destruction of the swine was a necessary part of the cure—thus : It is a constant fear and anxiety in the minds of those who have known mental derangement that a period of poor health might bring on a relapse. This would be specially true in a case like the one under consideration. But in the mind of this man, as a corrective and re – assurance in the face of such fears, there would always be the memory of a great herd of swine charging headlong into the sea. The “unclean spirits” were gone for good. There could be no relapse.
- Acts 19:13-16. Certain charlatan exorcists, typical parasites of their generation, began to make professional use of the holy names of Jesus and Paul. “And the evil spirits answered and said, I recognise the name Jesus and Paul I know personally ; but who are ye ? (There is a difference in the Gr eek words used here). It requires only the simple assumption that the man (in his saner moments ?) had listened to the preaching of Paul, and no further difficulty remains.
- “And there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit ; and he cried out, saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth ? Art thou come to destroy us ? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.” (Mark 1 :23,23).
Those who believe in the existence of unclean spirits read these words as a protest by the powers of evil against the impending conquest of their domain by the sinless Son of God. But such an interpretation is gratuitous and without evidence. Two details call for special attention : (1) the plural pronouns “we” which can hardly refer either to the man or the “unclean spirit” (he employs the word “I” in his next sentence). (2) the contradictory nature of the two statements : “Art thou come to destroy us ?” and “I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.” This excitable, bemused, bewildered creature had evidently been listening to some of the many arguments raging in Capernaum just then about Jesus of Nazareth. Said one:
“I tell you, this Jesus will be the destruction of us all. The Romans will take him for another false Messiah and when their legionaries extirpate him and his queer religion, we shall all suffer together.”
Said another:
“God forbid ! Nay, can you not see that such a man with such miracles and such teaching must be the Holy One of God ? He Is the Messiah, I tell you!”
And now, in the tense atmosphere of the synagogue, this poor soul shouts out an incoherent medley of all that he has heard. Is it to such incidents that James is alluding when he says :
“The demons also believe, and tremble”? (James 2:19).
- Summary of conclusions :
- “Unclean spirits” and “demons” do not exist.
- Most of the allusions in the gospels identify unclean spirits with recognizable disabilities.
- Were the terms “unclean spirit” and “demon” appropriated for the more mysterious afflictions, the causes of which were less clearly understood ?
- Jesus may have accepted and tolerated these mistaken notions because they were actually not far from the true Bible doctrine of angels of evil.
- The most difficult of the demoniac episodes in the gospels are capable of explanation without invoking the existence of evil spirits.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One