Origen compares, for the retirement of Jesus, Mt 4^''- and then allegorizes : Ephraim, according to On 4isif- | xa^nt^fia. ' ; ixUkOiv ixtiSit lis Tj« zif«» 'toS iXm xir/iaii,' lyyix tts iff^mu 'ije«Ai!iriaf,'r*«'Ef/>«7,aTKv'«(!e^To^/)oi;ff-ai''A«3'a^£»»jvfToX(»,etc.(neW
Berlin edition, pp. 420, 651). About the site he says nothing.
Eb. Nestle. EPILEPSY. — There is but one specific instance of this awful malady recorded for us in the Gospels.t This case is, however, common to all three Synoptists (cf. Mt W", Mk g'"-, Lk 9») ; and tlie three accounts, while not in verbal agreement, are sufficiently harmonious to leave no doubt in the mind of the reader as to the nature and nialig-
might itself lie derived from Si'pphoris, the first letter being dropped after the f of iU.
t 'Ejiileptic' is substituted b Ml 42J 171» .as tr. of frar.^ccivrh,.
'lunatick' of AV in
EQUALITY
nant character of the disease. It is noteworthy that the writers all attribute it to the active agency of demons ; and this is the more remark- able as St. Matthew, in another place, appears to diflerentiate between demon possession and epUepsy {Mt 4-^ daifxovti^o^evovs Kal afXrjvLai'ofi^vovs), Not only do the Evangelists record their own and the popular belief in the connexion of evil spirits with epilepsy ; they also lead us to believe that Jesus exercised His power on the presupposition of the truth of this contemporary idea (cf. JSlt 17'*, Mk 9==, Lk 9^2).
in this connexion that medical thought at this time and, indeed, for a long: period subsequent to this, was distinctly on the side of the Synoptists. Aretieus(c. 70A.D.) in writing of it (Si^jn. Morb, Diuturn. S7) attempts to explain the reason why epilepsy was called 'the s.i(.Ted illness' Oifin xixX-wxouiri TV,. -r«fc,»). The remedy, according to this writer, belonged not to human hut to Divine agency. Hippocrates, on the other hand, writing some five centuries earlier, refuses to accept the belief tliat iIilii- w.ls anything supernatural about
this tlisease. In )i: p i - in'lje exjilained in the same
way as any otii' r 'I p^nple are liable (ia-TE ^r^^v
htaxpivovTec ro v"- , .t .'v yeta-r^LLO.T^Vy k.t.X., Morb.
SacSOSIseelluLu ;, l..n,magc<ifSt.Luke,x>.'2<i]).
The important. i>l;i. r h. M l,\ th. l.ilief in the malevolent in- fluence of demons and in tlie powers of the exorcist will be recognized if we turn, e.g., to TertuUian, Apol. 23 ; Origen, c. Celg. vii. 334 ; Apost. Constit. viii. 26, amongst the written pro- ducts of early Christian thought.
The word employed by St. Matthew in his description of the epileptic boy (o-fXTjuafcrat), as well as in his catalogue of ailments (4^), shows that in the opinion of the ancients the moon had a preponderating influence in bringing on this disease (cf. Ps 121" for a reference to the baleful effect which the brilliant rays of the moon were supposed to exert, and which from the context seems to have been thought .as .hadly :is sunstroke). This belief, too, descended fai duwn inlo the Middle Ages; and, indeed, it (■.111 li.uilly li'' s.iid to have altogether vanished from th(^ iiii|iui.ir mind, though it is prob- ably now confined tot lie remoter quarters of human habitation.
A comparative study of the particular case de- scribed by each of the Synoptists reveals the fact that St. Mark gives a much more graphic and detailed account of the symptoms than either of the other two. According to this writer, tlie boy was deaf and dumb, he was liable to be seized with convulsions at any time or place (oTroi; edv, v."), to fall violently to the ground, foaming at his mouth, gnashing with and grinding his teeth. Finally, he is said to be gradually wasting away as .i rrsuK. of the frequency of the seizures. He was, iiiiMiox ir, afflictedfromhischildhood with this. -iw fill nial.iilv, a by no means uncommon feature of surh ca-rs (si'c art. 'Medicine,' by A. Macalisln, in lla-iin-s' /)B ill. 327"). St. Mark also gives a mm.I .h , ,,uiit of a fit which seems to have been Inoirjlii ..n l,y the presence of Jesus, or by the exciti'ininl mnsrciuent on his introduction to that presence (9-"). No sooner did he come before Jesus than a seizure with terrible convulsions took place, and falling on the ground he rolled about (fKuXfero does not seem to be adequately treated in EV) foaming.
Perhaps the most pecuhar part of the Markan narrative is the account of the healing process According to the Matthwan and Lukan \eisions the cuie was not only perfect, it was mstan txncous(Mt 17i8=Lk9J ) bt Mark on the otlKi hand sa\sit was giadual and difficult of accomplishment Itsus idoptin„' a tone of pel emptorv authontj ( ya tTiri/trirM rro ,\ ■^) addressed the spirit as i person and was answered I \ th latter who
con^ulslonsbe^ 1 l" " I "^ ' i '" '
the b\standeis
the healing acts of lesus It IS re\ealed in another lirecedin^, settioii he tells
of the healing by Jesus of a blind man at Bethsaida. The cure in this case, too, was effected gradually, and was completed onlv by the contact of His hands with the afflicted patient (see 822--'">).
That 'the scribes' seized the opportunity afibrded by this case to carry on their controversy with Jesus and His disciples is implied in St. Mark, where the element of hostility is referred to (see v." 'and scribes disputing against them' [7rp6s auroiSs]). The method of healing adopted by Jesus was in striking contrast to that to which they were accustomed to lend themselves (cf. SImbbath 61 and Toscfta Shabbath, in loc, where we learn of the employment of charm.s, such as amulets and winged insects of a certain kind, in the cure of epileptics). With Jesus it is the assertion of per- sonal superiority. His words carry with them the weight of indispvitable authority. The command is that of One who claims the lordship over disease and death. At the same time directness and sim- plicity are the essential characteristics of His atti- tude and bearing. Nor did Jesus permit this contrast to pass unnoticed (see Mt 12^, where He refers to a practice recognized as legitimate by the religionists of His day).