II.Sources

In our exploration of the demonology of Jesus, the synoptic gospels will be our principal source. While differing greatly in other respects, their treatments of demonology are remarkably similar. A list of the synonyms for evil spirits or Satan contains forty-one in Matthew, thirty-nine in Mark, and fifty-one in Luke; the differences in quantity are proportionate to the differing length of the gospels themselves.

The synoptic gospels seem to agree in their emphasis upon demon exorcism. There are six such accounts:

1. the first healing, the man in synagogue with unclean spirit
Mark 1:23-27, Luke 4:33-36

2. the wild Gadarene whose demon Jesus chases into the swine
Mark 5:1-21, Matthew 8: 28-34, Luke 8: 26-40

3. dumb (and blind?) man healed preceding accusation by priests
Matthew 9: 32-33, Matthew 12:22, Luke 11:14

4. daughter of Syro-Phoenician woman
Mark 7: 25-30, Matthew 15:22-28

5. epileptic boy whom disciples failed to heal
Mark 9:14-29, Matthew 17: 14-21, Luke 9:37-42

6. woman whose back is bent by Satan
Luke 13:11-16
If, as in the usual gospel criticism, one divides the sources into Mark, "Q" (that source which Matthew and Luke contain apart from Mark), and "L" (the source used exclusively by Luke), then he must give each source the exclusive rights to at least one story. And he must acknowledge that each gospel also omits something of the others. Thus Matthew omits the first healing in the synagogue and Luke omits the healing of the Syro-Phoenician's daughter. For this reason we shall no longer attempt to differentiate between source documents, but shall consider these three gospels as more or less a single source for the demonology of Jesus.

John gives no account of demon exorcism by Jesus, but he does make clear that he was aware of demonical possession:
The Jews answered him, "Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?" Jesus answered, "I have not a demon, but I honor my Father and you dishonor me."(4)
The author of John, who seems to have been well educated, may have dis­believed in demons and omitted accounts of exorcism for this reason. If, on the other hand, he did believe in demon possession, he still might have de­emphasized it in order to counter the elaborate beliefs of the gnostics. Paul had to fight such a battle even though he appears to have believed in demons himself. In writing to the Colossians Paul warns against over emphasizing angelology:
Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind."(5)
Whereas John at least mentions the demonology of Jesus in passing, Paul gives it no consideration at all in his letters. Thus we are left with the synoptic gospels for our major source. One might argue against their "objec­tivity" by attempting to prove that the gospel writers, who wrote in Greek, had attributed a fundamentally Greek demonology to the Hebrew Jesus. But this speculation leads nowhere. As will be pointed out later, Greek demonology is much less similar to that of Jesus than is his own Hebrew Demonology. In the meantime we shall discount any Greek influence.

***************

4. John 8:48-49.
5. Colossians 2: 18.

previous section ..|.. back to contents page ..|.. next section