From Himself n' I ■ ion noted by the
SjTioptists as t i . r |il=.Mk I'S, Lk
22«);andHein I —e services when
light be somewhat pergonal
^ i'-'j. .A <-oiiip:iii,son of one pair ■■-■ ■ ,-. in which
It Ihe Son ..while in
Kwi uie > >ii .'I M-.iu also confess >iii tiiij ii would ui.pear that'the iionvm for tliu Sacred Presence, such (cf. also Lk 15"- 1»). But
(>) On coming to the consideration of the kindred question arising out of Jesus' language respecting Satan, demons, and demoniacal possession, we are confronted with a more intricate and difficult problem. There can be no doubt, the present writer thinks, that as He beliexed in the personal existence of good, so He_also Ijelieved in thatjof I gvil angels. How far, on the (ittierTTand, we are ' bouncTto accept the \ ic" s which a literal interpre- tation of the pas.sago v.jn-ro ictLTcnce to them is found would convey, i.s anuther question, and one which demands some care in determining. In the first place, there are several instances where the language of Jesus respecting these beings is olmouoly figurnti^, and intondod- to bo intoX
protod oo ouolt In relating His experiences during the Temptation period, it Avould certainly seem as if He intended to convey, in languagoc vividly gyml>oli8a4, an idea of tlie tremendous difficulties wlikh beset Him in His choice of two alternatives. \Ihp popular^ Jewish Mefesianic ex- pectations He embodied iwa personified fonn, and Satan appears/in the narrative becgaise of the didactic gj»p»se whic^^e had iry^ew.
A similar interpretation seems necessary in Jesus' explanation of th.- iiaml.k- "f the S.nvcr (.Mt 1319 i^;j„., i ,„„fi; ■ Mk 415 * 0 ZtccjioXKX though Plummer (r ■ is here emphasizing His belief
1 ! re described as working. The
tijJTurative, and it seenic some- . - 111 that way. A yery rciiiark-
> .ilarly in
! iMl Which all hinder Him. He tan '(IS^T-.i), just 'tation in the first
K'urc is discovered llsciples(Lk 1018). . the power over Ivc, as being also II till the following
The s;iiue «ii'iaetic piini<ise IS t.. these beiii^-s ; therefore led to the conclusion that there is, in I towards this question, evidence of that deliberate which He set to Himself the task of accommodation to the limited knowledge of His fellow-meit. It seems to the present writer to be ver.v evident that Jesus knowingly refrainwl from correcting their iile.t~ .m this Mibject because He had an infinitely more i t . > perform. To say with
Bishop Gore tli i lainly reaches the level of
positive teach 1 1 is, seems to import more
significance in; ri it can bear (cf. Diss. p.
23f.). Theworii.i i i . i.r higher plane than this—
the correcting and revealing; oi cletails as to the nature, posi- tion, and employment of subordinate spiritual agencies. It was for Hia purpose that a general belief existed in the
which attended His discipt
ir one to the Jews ?sus to point to the as foreshadowed by !s' first efforts (cf.
Lukan narr;r i ' '
fall, inforin- i
by asking' I
Jobl6-i3n„.l.
tion (iyi, i„
Apostle. No less reiiLirkahle ami iii.^lruel
oomuion to St, Matthew and St. Luke, by w
danger of and tendency towards reverting
ACCOMMODATION
ACCOMMODATION
21
He speaks of the un
ig in Ills quest, he dehberates with himself as to his fi )f action, and finally makes up his mind to return t( whence he was driven. With himself he brings !
S^
other spirits, and thev all take up their abodi chamber, which was all too ready to receive tl Mt 1243-45). For the belief that more than one deiiion might possess a human being, compare Mk 5", Mt 8-8f-, Lk 826r., and Lk 82 (!TTi i^,^i,„,). The teaching of Jesus is not only based on the popular belief in the active connexion between evil spirits and the children of men, but there is a reference in it to the generally accepted idea that wild and desert resions are the special habitat of these beings (see art. ' Demon, Devil ' in Hastings' BB, vol. i. p. 6931>).
Jesus, on more than one occasion, seems to sanction the current conception ot the malignant influence of demons on the human body, their activity in this respect being controlled and guided by their chief, Satan (o apx'^» i-i» ia-i/^tiiit, Mt 1224). St. Luke's diagnosis of the woman's case who was aftiicted for eighteen years, ia simply that she was possessed of a ' spirit of infirmity' (rvsiJ/^es S^a-Sm'ix!, Lk 13"); and Jesus apparently countenanced the belief by the words contained in His reproof (<i( tSvint 0 2«T»e««t, v.lO). A similar instance of His countenanc- mg popular beliefs occurs in the healing of the deaf and dumb epileptic (Mk 9n-27). The boy's father believes his son to be the victim of demoniac malignity {ixtna. -r.£i>«t «A«Xo«, v.I7) ; and Jesus addresses the spirit by an authoritative command (W
«A«Aflv ICOA xoi^ov TCEij/ia, lyu hiraa-FM ffot, v.25).
Perhaps the surest e-yidenoe ^ve have that Jesus deliberately suited His language to the notions of His day arises out of the way in which He wrought His cures, depending as He 'did on the moral and spiritual forces inherent in His own Person. A word, a command, a touch of the hand suffices His purpose (cf. Mt »\ Mk 1=7, Lk 13'''). There is no trace "of His ever having employed any of the current methods of exorcism— the use of certain magic formulffi, such as ' the inefl'able Name,' etc. (see Edersheim's Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, bk. iii. eh. xiv. and Aj). X'Vl. Cf. the astonishment which Jesus' method created amoni^st His countrymen [Lk i^ ■ cf. Ac 19"]). That He knewof such methods is evident from the ironical question He put to the Pharisees who accused Him of collusion with Beelzebub (Mt 122'=Lk ll'S). For evidence that Jesus believed in power over e-nl spirits exercised by others not directly com- missioned by Him, cf. Mt 7=^ Mk 9^'- = Lk 9^i>'-.