•Til. ' ' .; cf., as re-tards Christ's general teach-
iiij;, M; , 1 I re astonished at his te.iching; for he
tau'lii: ni:,'authprity, and not as the scrihes.'
t"if tin . .i I u I iiioiis bodily sickness also cured, though
Christ was not present (Lk T^).
t Cf. Sajce, Hibbert Lectures, p. 302fl. ; Conjbeare in JQR ix. 583 ff.
§ In the parallel passages (Mt (W 12Mir., Lk llUT) there is no mention of Christ being possessed, tlie accusation is that He cast out demons bv Beelzebub.
II Cf. Jn ]32"i Si«(3»».« with 13-7 i i«t«.«;.
Gospels), are ditt'erentiated from 'demon'; whereas, according to the Synoptics, all belong to the same category, Satan being the chief (Mt 12-*). The passage Jn 10=° receives additional significance in the light of the Heb. equivalent, compared, c.ff., with Hos 9" the man that hath the spirit is mad' (nnrr u-x yJtJD). Delitzsch (NT in Heb. renders Jn 10=" dai/i6fiof Ixei- itai /iaiVerai, by iS ia K!n Viii'pi, the last words of which should be com- pared with the rendering of the Pesh. 1 1 » Knn
Gospel demonology may, therefore, be briefly summed up thus : —
(1) Demons are under a head, Satan ; they form a kingdom. (2) They are incorporeal, and gener- ally, though not neces-sarily, invisible. (3) They inhabit certain places which they prefer to others. (4) They tend to live in groups. (5) They have names, and are sometimes identified with their victims, at other times ditt'erentiated from them. (6) 'They are the cause of mental and jihysical disease to men, women, and children. (7) They can pass in and out of men, and even animals. (8) More than one can take possession of a man at the same time. (9) Christ made it one of His chief aims to overthrow this kingdom, and set up His own in its place. (10) He cast out demons through His own name, or by His word. (11) He could delegate this power, which was regarded as some- thing new. (12) He never treats the possessed as wilful sinners, which is in strong contrast to His words to the scribes and Pharisees. (13) Only on the rarest occasions does He come into direct contact with the possessed. (14) His Divine and human natures are recognized by demons. (15) At His .second coming the mem- bers of this kingdom are to be condemned to eternal fire.
5. In endeavouring to reach some definite con- clusions on this difticult subject of Gospel denton- ology, it is well to place certain considerations in juxtaposition. On the one hand, the history of mankind shows that a superstitious belief in evildlsp(i>ed demons, to whom everj; imaginable niuuwaiil ein uiiistaiiee is attributed, is universal ; tlieie is a remaiUaMe similarity, in essence, in the ileiiKinolony of all times ; it stretches, from the earliest times to the present day, like a great chain along the course of human history. The demonology of the Gospels shows itself, in many respects, unmistakably akin to this universal superstition. It is impossible to ignore the fact that, in its broad outlines. Gospel demonology is in accordance with the current Jewish beliefs of the time. It will, moreover, have been noticed, from the details given above, that the data in the Gospels themselves are inconsistent. Again, the way in which in the Gospels much is attributed to the action of demons (deafness, dumbness, etc.), looks naive to modern eyes. There is also this further consideration which conspires in discredit- ing the Gospel accounts on the subject, viz. that those who at the present day believe in the con- tinued activity of demons are almost invariably such as are on a low stage of civilization, or they are peasants in country districts who have but rare opportunities of coming into contact with cultured people. And, lastly, account must be taken of the fact that very few could be found nowadays who would claim to point to any instance in their ex- perience of the existence of demoniacal possession ; thus the only parallels to Gospel demonology would have to be sought among the acknowledged super-
DEMON, DEMONIACS
DEN
443
stitions of the Middle Ages, and the like. These considerations tend to the conclusion that the Gospel acconnts of demons cannot be regarded as essentially diH'eient from the innumerable accounts from other sources.
But there is a second set of considerations, and to ignore these would be most unscientific. When the whole chain of demonology, from primitive times to the present day, is considered, it is quite impossible for an unbiassed mind to be blind to the fact that, in spite of many points of similarity and even of essential identity, the demonology of the Gospels offers something siti generis ; one be- comes conscious of the fact that this link in the long chain is very different from all the other links. Another thing that strikes the student of the subject as very remarkable is, that Gospel demonology and the current Jewish belief are not more alike than is the case ; they agree in so many respects, that one feels that only the existence of some extraordinary factor prevents their being wholly identical. But more than this, the dis- similarity between the two is just as striking as their points of similarity : in the one there is nothing eccentric, nothing done for effect, or for self-glorification,* there is no casting out of demons for the sake of exhibiting power, there is none of the ' wonder-working ' which characterizes other ns through ting out of