| |
Demon, Daemon, Demoniac, Demonology
|
dem'-mon, de-mo'-ni-ak, de-mon-ol'-o-j (unclean
or evil spirit, devil)
RELATED: 666, Antichrist, Devil, Jesus Christ, Satan |
|
|
|
|
|
Easton's Bible Dictionary
the Greek form, rendered "devil" in the Authorized Version
of the New Testament. Daemons are spoken of as spiritual beings ( Matthew
8:16 ; 10:1
; 12:43
- 45
) at enmity with God, and as having a certain power over man ( James
2:19 ; Revelation
16:14 ). They recognize our Lord as the Son of God ( Matthew
8:20 ; Luke
4:41 ). They belong to the number of those angels that "kept not their first
estate," "unclean spirits," "fallen angels," the angels of the devil ( Matthew
25:41 ; Revelation
12:7 - 9
). They are the "principalities and powers" against which we must "wrestle" (
Ephesians
6:12 ).
Hitchcock's Dictionary of Bible Names
(no entry)
Smith's Bible Dictionary
In the Gospels generally, in ( James
2:19 ) and in Revelation
16:14 the demons are spoken of as spiritual beings, at enmity with God, and
having power to afflict man not only with disease, but, as is marked by the frequent
epithet "un-clean," with spiritual pollution also. They "believe" the power of
God "and tremble," ( James
2:19 ) they recognized the Lord as the Son of God, ( Matthew
8:29 ; Luke
4:41 ) and acknowledged the power of his name, used in exorcism. In the place
of the name of Jehovah, by his appointed messengers, ( Acts
19:15 ) and looked forward in terror to the judgment to come. ( Matthew
8:29 ) The description is precisely that of a nature akin to the angelic in
knowledge and powers, but with the emphatic addition of the idea of positive and
active wickedness.
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
dem'-mon, de-mo'-ni-ak, de-mon-ol'-o-ji (daimonion, earlier
form daimon = pneuma akatharton, poneron, "demon," "unclean or evil spirit," incorrectly
rendered "devil" in the King James Version):
I. Definition.
The word daimon or daimonion seems originally to have had two closely related
meanings; a deity, and a spirit, superhuman but not supernatural. In the former
sense the term occurs in the Septuagint translation of Deuteronomy 32:17 ; Psalms
106:37 ; Acts 17:18. The second of these meanings, which involves a general reference
to vaguely conceived personal beings akin to men and yet belonging to the unseen
realm, leads to the application of the term to the peculiar and restricted class
of beings designated "demons" in the New Testament.
II. The Origin of Biblical Demonology.
An interesting scheme of development has been suggested (by Baudissin and others)
in which Biblical demonism is brought through polytheism into connection with
primitive animism.
1. The Evolutionary Theory:
A simple criticism of this theory, which is now the ascendant, will serve fittingly
to introduce what should be said specifically concerning Biblical demonology.
(1) Animism, which is one branch of that general primitive
view of things which is designated as spiritism, is theory that all Nature is
alive (see Ladd, Phil. Rel., I, 89 f) and that all natural processes are due to
the operation of living wills.
(2) Polytheism is supposed to be the outcome of animism. The vaguely conceived
spirits of the earlier conception are advanced to the position of deities with
names, fixed characters and specific functions, organized into a pantheon.
(3) Biblical demonology is supposed to be due to the solvent of monotheism upon
contemporary polytheism. The Hebrews were brought into contact with surrounding
nations, especially during the Persian, Babylonian and Greek periods, and monotheism
made room for heathenism by reducing its deities to the dimension of demons. They
are not denied all objective reality, but are denied the dignity and prerogatives
of deity. |
2. Objections to the Theory:
The objections to this ingenious theory are too many and too serious to be overcome.
(1) The genetic connection between animism and polytheism
is not clear. In fact, the specific religious character of animism is altogether
problematical. It belongs to the category of primitive philosophy rather than
of religion. It is difficult to trace the process by which spirits unnamed and
with characteristics of the vaguest become deities-- especially is it difficult
to understand how certain spirits only are advanced to the standing of deities.
More serious still, polytheism and animism have coexisted without close combination
or real assimilation (see Sayce, Babylonia and Assyria, 232; Rogers, Religion
of Babylonia and Assyria, 75 f) for a long course of history. It looks as if animism
and polytheism had a different raison d'etre, origin and development. It is, at
least, unsafe to construct a theory on the basis of so insecure a connection.
(2) The interpretation of heathen deities as demons by no means indicates that
polytheism is the source of Biblical demonology. On general principles, it seems
far more likely that the category of demons was already familiar, and that connection
with polytheism brought about an extension of its application. A glance at the
Old Testament will show how comparatively slight and unimportant has been the
bearing of heathen polytheism upon Biblical thought. The demonology of the Old
Testament is confined to the following passages: Leviticus 16:21 , 22 ; 17:7;
Isaiah 13:21 ; 34:13 ; Deuteronomy 32:17 ; Psalms 106:37 (elsewhere commented
upon; see COMMUNION WITH DEMONS). Gesenius well says of Leviticus 16:21 that it
is "vexed with the numerous conjectures of interpreters." If the prevalent modern
view is accepted we find in it an actual meeting-point of popular superstition
and the religion of Yahweh (see AZAZEL).
According to Driver (HDB, I, 207), this item in the Levitical ritual "was intended
as a symbolical declaration that the land and the people are now purged from guilt,
their sins being handed over to the evil spirit to whom they are held to belong,
and whose home is in the desolate wilderness remote from human habitations (verse
22, into a land cut off)." A more striking instance could scarcely be sought of
the way in which the religion of Yahweh kept the popular spiritism at a safe distance.
Leviticus 17:7 (see COMMUNION WITH DEMONS) refers to participation in the rites
of heathen worship. The two passages--Isaiah 13:20 , 21 ; 34:13 ,14 --are poetical
and really imply nothing as to the writer's own belief. Creatures both seen and
unseen supposed to inhabit places deserted of man are used, as any poet might
use them, to furnish the details for a vivid word-picture of uninhabited solitude.
There is no direct evidence that the narrative of the Fall (Genesis 3:1 - 19)
has any connection with demonology (see HDB, I, 590 note), and the suggestion
of Whitehouse that the mention of satyrs and night-monsters of current mythology
with such creatures as jackals, etc., implies "that demons were held to reside
more or less in all these animal denizens of the ruined solitude" is clearly fanciful.
It is almost startling to find that all that can possibly be affirmed of demonology
in the Old Testament is confined to a small group of passages which are either
legal or poetical and which all furnish examples of the inhibiting power of high
religious conceptions upon the minds of a naturally superstitious and imaginative
people. Even if we add all the passages in which a real existence seems to be
granted to heathen deities (e. g. Numbers 21:29 ; Isaiah 19:1, etc.) and interpret
them in the extreme sense, we are still compelled to affirm that evidence is lacking
to prove the influence of polytheism in the formation of the Biblical doctrine
of demons.
(3) This theory breaks down in another still more vital particular. The demonology
of the Bible is not of kin either with primitive animism or popular Sere demonism.
In what follows we shall address ourselves to New Testament demonology--that of
the Old Testament being a negligible quantity. |
|
III. New Testament Demonology.
The most marked and significant fact of New Testament demonology is that it provides
no materials for a discussion of the nature and characteristics of demons. Whitehouse
says (HDB, I, 593) that New Testament demonology "is in all its broad characteristics
the demonology of the contemporary Judaism stripped of its cruder and exaggerated
features." How much short of the whole truth this statement comes will appear
later, but as it stands it defines the specific direction of inquiry into the
New Testament treatment of demons; namely, to explain its freedom from the crude
and exaggerated features of popular demonism. The presence among New Testament
writers of an influence curbing curiosity and restraining the imagination is of
all things the most important for us to discover and emphasize. In four of its
most vital features the New Testament attitude on this subject differs from all
popular conceptions:
(a) in the absence of all imaginative details concerning
demons;
(b) in the emphasis placed upon the moral character of demons and their connection
with the ethical disorders of the human race;
(c) in the absence of confidence in magical methods of any kind in dealing with
demons;
(d) in its intense restrictions of the sphere of demoniacal operations. |
A brief treatment under each of these heads will serve to present an ordered statement
of the most important facts.
(a) In the New Testament we are told practically nothing
about the origin, nature, characteristics or habits of demons. In a highly figurative
passage (Matthew 12:43) our Lord speaks of demons as passing through "waterless
places," and in the story of the Gadarene demoniac (Luke 8:31) the "abyss" is
mentioned as the place of their ultimate detention. The method of their control
over human beings is represented in two contrasted ways (compare Mark 1:23 ; Luke
4:33), indicating that there was no fixed mode of regarding it. With these three
scant items our direct information ceases. We are compelled to infer from the
effects given in the limited number of specific instances narrated. And it is
worthy of more than passing mention that no theoretical discussion of demons occurs.
The center of interest in the Gospels is the person of Jesus, the sufferers and
the cures. Interest in the demons as such is absent. Certain passages seem to
indicate that the demons were able to speak (see Mark 1:24 , 26 , 34 ; Luke 4:41,
etc.), but comparing these statements with others (compare Mark 1:23 ; Luke 8:28)
it is seen that no distinction is drawn between the cries of the tormented in
the paroxysms of their complaint and the cries attributed to the demons themselves.
In other particulars the representation is consistent. The demons belong to the
unseen world, they are incapable of manifestation except in in the disorders which
they cause--there are no materializations, no grotesque narratives of appearances
and disappearances, no morbid dealing with repulsive details, no license of speculation
in the narratives. In contrast with this reticence is not merely the demonology
of primitive people, but also that of the non-canonical Jewish books. In the Book
of Enoch demons are said to be fallen angels, while Josephus holds that they are
the spirits of the wicked dead. In the rabbinical writings speculation has run
riot in discussing the origin, nature and habits of demons. They are represented
as the offspring of Adam and Eve in conjunction with male and female spirits,
as being themselves sexed and capable of reproduction as well as performing all
other physical functions. Details are given of their numbers, haunts and habits,
of times and places where they are especially dangerous, and of ways and methods
of breaking their power (see EXORCISM). Full sweep is also given to the imagination
in descriptive narratives, oftentimes of the most morbid and unwholesome character,
of their doings among men. After reading some of these narratives one can agree
with Edersheim when he says, "Greater contrast could scarcely be conceived than
between what we read in the New Testament and the views and practices mentioned
in Rabbinic writings" (LTJM, II, 776).
(b) It is also clearly to be noted that while in its original application the
term daimonion is morally indifferent, in New Testament usage the demon is invariably
an ethically evil being. This differentiates the New Testament treatment from
extra-canonical Jewish writings. In the New Testament demons belong to the kingdom
of Satan whose power it is the mission of Christ to destroy. It deepens and intensifies
its representations of the earnestness of human life and its moral issues by extending
the sphere of moral struggle to the invisible world. It clearly teaches that the
power of Christ extends to the world of evil spirits and that faith in Him is
adequate protection against any evils to which men may be exposed. (For significance
of this point see Plummer, Luke (ICC), 132-33.)
(c) The New Testament demonology differs from all others by its negation of the
power of magic rites to deliver from the affliction. Magic which is clearly separable
from religion at that specific point (see Gwatkin, Knowledge of God, I, 249) rests
upon and is dependent upon spiritism. The ancient Babylonian incantation texts,
forming a surprisingly large proportion of the extant documents, are addressed
directly to the supposed activities and powers of demons. These beings, who are
not trusted and prayed to in the sense in which deities are, command confidence
and call forth prayer, are dealt with by magic rites and formulas (see Rogers,
op. cit., 144). Even the Jewish non-canonical writings contain numerous forms
of words and ceremonies for the expulsion of demons. In the New Testament there
is no magic. The deliverance from a demon is a spiritual and ethical process (see
EXORCISM).
(d) In the New Testament the range of activities attributed to demons is greatly
restricted. According to Babylonian ideas:
"These demons were everywhere; they lurked in every corner, watching for their
prey. The city streets knew their malevolent presence, the rivers, the seas, the
tops of mountains; they appeared sometimes as serpents gliding noiselessly upon
their victims, as birds horrid of mien flying resistlessly to destroy or afflict,
as beings in human forms, grotesque, malformed, awe-inspiring through their hideousness.
To these demons all sorts of misfortune were ascribed--a toothache; a headache,
a broken bone, a raging fever, an outburst of anger, of jealousy, of incomprehensible
disease" (Rogers, op. cit., 145). In the extra-canonical Jewish sources the same
exuberance of fancy appears in attributing all kinds of ills of mind and body
to innumerable, swarming hosts of demons lying in wait for men and besieging them
with attacks and ills of all descriptions. Of this affluence of morbid fancy there
is no hint in the New Testament. A careful analysis of the instances will show
the importance of this fact. There are, taking repetitions and all, about 80 references
to demons in the New Testament. In 11 instances the distinction between demon-possession
and diseases ordinarily caused is clearly made (Matthew 4:24 ; 8:16 ; 10:8 ; Mark
1:32 , 34 ; 6:13 ; 16:17 , 18 ; Luke 4:40 , 41 ; 9:1; 13:32 ; Acts 19:12). The
results of demon-possession are not exclusively mental or nervous (Matthew 9:32
, 33 ; 12:22). They are distinctly and peculiarly mental in two instances only
(Gadarene maniac, Matthew 8:28 and parallels, and Acts 19:13 f). Epilepsy is specified
in one case only (Matthew 17:15). There is distinction made between demonized
and epileptic, and demonized and lunatic (Matthew 4:24). There is distinction
made between diseases caused by demons and the same disease not so caused (compare
Matthew 12:22 ; 15:30). In most of the instances no specific symptoms are mentioned.
In an equally large proportion, however, there are occasional fits of mental excitement
often due to the presence and teaching of Christ. |
Conclusions:
A summary of the entire material leads to the conclusion that, in the New Testament
cases of demon-possession, we have a specific type of disturbance, physical or
mental, distinguishable not so much by its symptoms which were often of the most
general character, as by its accompaniments. The aura, so to say, which surrounded
the patient, served to distinguish his symptoms and to point out the special cause
to which his suffering was attributed. Another unique feature of New Testament
demonology should be emphasized. While this group of disorders is attributed to
demons, the victims are treated as sick folk and are healed. The whole atmosphere
surrounding the narrative of these incidents is calm, lofty and pervaded with
the spirit of Christ. When one remembers the manifold cruelties inspired by the
unreasoning fear of demons, which make the annals of savage medicine a nightmare
of unimaginable horrors, we cannot but feel the worldwide difference between the
Biblical narratives and all others, both of ancient and modern times, with which
we are acquainted. Every feature of the New Testament narratives points to the
conclusion that in them we have trustworthy reports of actual cures. This is more
important for New Testament faith than any other conclusion could possibly be.
It is also evident that Jesus treated these cases of invaded personality, of bondage
of depression, of helpless fear, as due to a real superhuman cause, to meet and
overcome which He addressed Himself. The most distinctive and important words
we have upon this obscure and difficult subject, upon which we know far too little
to speak with any assurance or authority, are these: "This kind can come out by
nothing, save by prayer" (Mark 9:29).
LITERATURE
(1) The most accessible statement of Baudissin's theory
is in Whitehouse's article "Demons," etc., in Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible
(five volumes).
(2) For extra-canonical Jewish ideas use Lange, Apocrypha, 118, 134; Edersheim,
LTJM, Appendices XIII, XVI.
(3) For spirit-lore in general see Ladd, Phil. Rel., index under the word, and
standard books on Anthropology and Philosophy of Religion under Spiritism.
(4) For Babylonian demonology see summary in Rogers, Religion of Babylonia and
Assyria, 144. |
Louis Matthews Sweet
Tags:
bible commentary, bible history, bible reference, bible study, daemon, define, demon, demoniac, demonology, devil, evil, spiritual beings
Comments:
|
 |
|
