Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1%
by -
Graham H, Twelftree,
B. A.
Thesis
submitted
of Nottingham May,
for
the degree
of Doctor
1981.
r t4o
BACKGROUND AND SETTING (Exorcism 2,2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 in first century Texts Palestine)
12 17 33 36 38 43 50 52 61
Material
The Old Testament Tobit Jubilees The Dead Sea Scrolls Pseudo-Philo The New Testament
71 74 77 83 88 99
Apollonius
III
lo4
3.2 The Demoniac in the Synagogue 3-3 The Gadarene Demoniac 3.4 The Syrophoenician 3-5 The Epileptic 3.6 The Beelzebul 3-7 The Temptations 3.8 Jesus' Answer to John Mission(s) Boy Controversy Woman's Daughter
IV
JESUS-THE-EXORCIST
286
-Conclusions
VI
347
-Ali
VII
CONCTIJSIONS
357
Notes Bibliography
363 418
ABSTRACT This quest for study attempts to make a contribution The Synoptic important studies to the Gospels give the
in the ministry on Jesus there stories, with but Jesus. part way is
associated
ministry? traditions
To answer of of
questions
we begin
in first
Having data in
answered
this
question relating
we e=ine
the principal
Gospels which
to Jesus and exorcism. of the material to the reports and, how the can,
We attempt with
elements
reasonable
confidence,
be attributed
of those early
who witnessed
Church handled
We are then
in a position
of the
Church understood
of the historical-Jesus
a brief
chapter
his
exorcistic
activity.
to conclude, his
to give ministry,
to associate
and eschatology.
PREFACE
Although contents
I=t
take study
full
responsibility conscious
for
the
of this
I am very
him for
encouragement
a beginner.
I cannot
of my research
generously
of himself for
discovering
of the ancient
continue Christian
to value faith.
friendship
Church
to come to
as those Michael
to complete various
Linda
Sue Radford,
thankyou -
to Barbara
my wife
I offer
for is their
vii
and patience.
Catherine
to play
Easter
1981
Graham H. Twelftree
fUr Orientforschung
Bauer
W Bauer A Greek-English
(1952) tran o New Testament the of W. F. W. Arndt by F. and and adapted Gingrich Chicago, BeginninLa
(eds.
(University 1957)
F. J. Foakes-Jackson
)'The BeginninRs
Part
I The Acts
(Macmillan, BHH
und Ruprecht,
Library
Sacra lator
H. Chadwick (Cambridge
Cambridgel
CdT Cr6mer
Chronique H. of Cremer
New'Testament
T&T-Clark,
Edinburgh,,
CSNT
Christ Studies
and Spirit
Universityl DNTT
DUj-. EbO
The Ebers Papyrus, -see B. Ebbell The Papyrus_Ebers (Oxford University, London, 1937)
The Edwin-Smith Breasted University Papyrus, see J. H. Papyrus 2 Vols. 1930) Chicago, Jerusalem on New Testament 1964)
Ed. Smith P
Encyclopedia
Ep. R EQ ER ERE
Epworth-Review Evangelical Ecumenical Encyclopaedia Quarterly Review of Religion 1908ff. ) and Ethics 13 Vols- (TO Clark,
Ephemerides Theologicae . ..... ..... The Ex_positor Expository Times New. Tesiament'Aj)crha
Ex P_. Hennecke
(eds. ) E.
Hennecke and W. Schneemelcher-2 Vols. 1959 and 1964, ET, SCM, London, 1973-4) HR_ HSE History of ReligionsL. Gaston Hora6 Synopticae .......... Electronicae (Scholars, HTR IB Harvard 'Missoula, Theological 1973) Review Bible
The Interpreterb
(Abingdon-, Nashvillej
IDB The Interpreter's Bible
1952ff-)
of the and K. (Abingdon,
Dictionary
Crim. 4-Vols.
Nashville,
IEJ _Interp. IN JAOS Israel Interpretation Irish Journal Society JBL JBR JEA ;jH_S Jis JPOS Journal Journal Journal Journal Journal Journal Society JQR JR_ JRS iss JTS Lampe Jewish J-ournal Journal Journal Journal
1962ff. )
Journal
Exploration
Theological of the
of Biblical of Bible
the Palesti
Quarterly of Religion
Review
Greek
Oxford,
1961)
LCQ
Liddell and Scott Lutheran Church Quarterly R. Scott revised A GreekH. S. Jones 1940, H. G. Liddelland English (Oxford Lexicon, Universityt
Oxford,
Supp. 1969)
LXX Miracles SeptuagintMiracles. Philosophy Mowbray, Cambridge Studies in their
(ed. ) C. F. D. Moule
xi
Moulton and Milligan J. H. Moulton Vobabulary (Hodder Nov. T NRT ... NTQT and G. Milligan The of the Greek Testament London, 1930)
and Stoughton,
Novum Testamentum Revue Theologique . .......... E* K. 4semann New Testament Questionsof Today (19659 ET9 SCM, London, 1969) Nouvelle
Studies
AcadeMI of the British 'bi*griechischen apyri'Graecae'Magicae: Zauberpapyri (hrsg. ) K. Preisendin Leipzig und Berlin, 3 Bffnde,,. (Teubner,
Proceedings
1928ff. ). The papyri are cited papyrus and line numbers. PSB PSBA RB 1; E
RGG3
by
Princeton Archeology
Proceedings
TUbingen'. 1957ff. ) RQ
SB
Rdvue de Qumran
H. L. Strack und P. Billerbeck Kommentar zum Neuen*Testament aus Talmud und Midrash 6 BUnde,, (Beck, Mttnchen,, 1922ff. )
Society Studia
of Biblical Evangelica
Journal
of Theology
in Religion Philonica
Studia_Theologica
xii
Supp.
Supplement Tyndie*Bulletin Theological Dictionary Testament,, lo Vols. Rapids, 1964ff. ) ET o;f Theologisches .. (hrsg. ) . Wrterbuch Neuen Testament ...................... zum
G Kittel und G. Friedrich Berichte Revue
. . A .......... ..... W8rte uch zum Neuen
T. Bull TDNT
9 Bndeu
(Koh1hammer, Stuttgart,
th. B Th. R Theologische Theologische
Theology
1933ff*)
Today
ThWNT
Theologisches
Testament TPAPA
(see TDNT above) and Proceedings of the in Matthew and H J. 1963) Philological Association
Tradition
Tradition
und Glaube: Festgabe fr K*G. Kuhn (hrsg. ) G. Jeremias, H-W. Kuhn und Ho Stegemann'(Vandenhoeck Ruprechtl Ottingen,
Zeitschrift uarterly (; Review
und.
1971)
TZ ZSQR VC VT WANT
Christopher
M. Hooker London,
and C. Hickling
(SCM, -
ZA
. Sprache
alttestamentliche
Theologie
Kttch-g-
texts I have followed Rabbinic London, 1976) but G. Vermes Jesus . the . Jew (Fontana, ) for y. the Jerusal6m'Talmud, I have followed In abbreviating J. A. Fitzmyer for Studv for
using
The Dead
abbreviations clear
biblical
be sufficiently
to require
here.
INTRODUCTION
woman to death
in attempt
at exorcism,
and his
friend
unstable
spiritj
the Central
Criminal
During Strover
unconscious it
was alleged. Mr Strover was said to have told the police that
as they tried
Rutherford be the spirit
out of her,
Miss
to
claimed
Reports
like
this,
(2) popular
interest exorcism,
in (4)
the occult,
(3)
by no mean of Exeter's
of opinion
The Bishop
on exorcism
recommends -
"It
is much to be desired
appoint a priest
that
should
as diocesan
to the Archbishops,
of England
1106. we believe
that
is
in danger
of making a serious
We believe
that
status
in the
views
represented
in these
seek the support of the NTj especially (7) In the current debate the student of Jesus. of Jesus and the Gospelsq to elucidate therefore in
particularly weighty
responsibility
the data
for
survey Gospel
was
thirteen
40-45;
healing
2: 1-12;
stories
3: 1-6;
5: 1-20;
the most numerous (apart and Luke like of Jesus' dealings in under-
story
in Mark.
And though
from Mtt. 12: 22ff. /Lk. 11: 14, seeFp6206ffbelow) Matthew provide Mark, ministry with no extra agree that detailed exorcism stories of exorcism they,
aspect Jesus'
and go so far
as to suggest is of central
significance
standing
ministry
The importance
of the miracles
for
the Evangelists'
of Jesus
was reflected
in
miracles
contributors sought
to this
search
of the theological
Heinrich
rationalistic
explanations
of the NT witness
they were no longer an important part (10) In his Das Leben Jesu to Jesus.
lectures
of 1832 Riedrich
acts, not
Schleiermacher
contrary
of his
stories
places
Jesus outside
of human
point
came in
the
of D. F. Strauss' of miracle,
Life
happened' that
but by examining
and postulated
stories,
of
should be understood
Strauss' Life
tmyth 1.04)
directed
primarily
at the problem
of miracle
If
But "with view Strauss begins the period of the non-miraculous of miracle
of Jesus...
the question
constantly
the background.
part
Adolf of treating
of Strauss
attempted (18)
that
the
existed, did
would assign
ourd419) importance
critical
deecb which
attributed
Richard times
He Hiers
has pointed
out
that
in more recent
in scholarly exorcism in the NT has been neglected 21 ) NT work Hans Conzelmann's famous RGG3 article(22) which Jesus reviewed research the then offers current position in the life or of
no treatment
of the miracles
exorcism traditions
this neglect in the
associated
'lives' is
is
Bornkamm's authoritative
mention
the works,
miracles
or exorcisms play no (24) Jesus. And now even more the Man and the Myth-gives treatment of Jesu miraclese(25)
a very
I5
So despite activity present for state the apparent importance of Jesus' exorcistic the
the Synoptic
tradition
(see p. 2 above)
the spell
of the reports
of Jesus?
this
general that
neglect
there
studies
have taken
in the Gospels.
by Van der Loos in which he has a significant section (27) However it is mainly a on 'Healing of the Possessed' . compendium of the views of others with little analysis from
a historical-critical
of the miracles (28) stories.
perspective.
have given only
studies
to the exorcism
of
importance (29)
the exorcism
stories
in Jesus' critically
Nevertheless stories
Kallas
does not
ine
our knowledge
the historical-Jesus-the-Exorcisto(30)
also
recognizes
the
importance
of the
6
does not do justice (Chapter a asido to the Synoptic V below) Vermes' data. We will
suggestion
gives
considerable
attention using
miracle-worker. that
study
we want to press
and we want to concentrate the miracle definition legitimate stories stories. of 'magic' Hull's
of of the
as well
miracle
Hellenistic if
be asking stories
Bultmann
come into
the Synoptic
motifs
s the
contemporaries cuts
so directly this
be asking
have thought
him to be a
7
In the light of what we have said so far we need to do the only
two things.
at recovering not
historical-Jesus-the-Exorcist. trying Jesus, himself see if to sketch but also a picture endeavouring to his
involves aspect
of the historical-
to see how Jesus understood exorcism audience We will . also need to Church
in relation
assessed
Jesus as an exorcist.
to do this the
we will
begin
(in
Chapter
II) and
of exorcism to Jesus'
would in first
III) will
data This
the basis
where we will
be sketching (Chapter
Church
in relation
exorcisms.
are closely
allied
and demon-possession*
In contrast
from occasional
references
I.
not give our attention to demonology and demon-possession.
Another
area
that study
is is
arguably exorcism
related
to,
but
outside Though
of the present
debate
in some quarters
exorcism,
(36)
analysis bearing
of exorcism on that
debate.
ii
our
first be able
task to
we will Before
stories
of Jesus.
going
further
(b) and to
background
stories?
that
will
enable
us to the
of Jesus we furnish
Exorcism
evil Our
attempt
from reference
to
their to
control
and cast
habitat. (2)
spirits/demons omits
out/expe (1)
'- for as we
present 'technique',
definition
vill
and the it
next
chapter, not
vary
so
might
be said
beyond a few
of command.
and practice
of
exorcism
presupposes the
a'belief
and 'demon-possession'.
Although in particular,
NT in
general, interest
it own sake
is
the Beelzebul
Controversy
see Fpzo4ffbelow)
11
10
through
totally
dominating
or possessing
individuals,
should his
to
set
within
when dealing
part
currency important is
Palestine. with
Secondly, that
will
be and as
material later
contempory see,. it
Jesus but
also
literature
we will predate
sometimes
contains
the literature
But herein
lies
deal with
of ascertaining 1 of the literature times evident exorcism of Jesus' the Strange exorcists We will these stories. refer&-d
belong ideas
and which
problem,
apparent
when dealing
as part and
(Mk. 9: 38ff.
of the Beelzebul
Controversy distinct
in the light
of the Jesus
In our introduction
it
was noted
that
some recent
works
ii
11
related
to our theme have greatly 'Jewish' the or (4) Such a rigid premises.
concentrated of Jesus is
the
milieu
approach objects
on is
the of
.. t. : of this chapter
against
'widening' stories
Tcherikover
points
out that
has always
of transit, influences
which of
and to adapt
own original ic
the Hellenist
his all
so readily there is
imported to
Jews of the Palestinian (7) Birt as we will cultures'. see the idea that world Palestine (see pp.. ZS
was not
outside
FF. below).
The first
part
of this Material',
chapter
('The
Babylonian covers
Texts' material
below,
dealt date),
with
here because
plaae
of origin
than
predates
our period.
that
known in
first
(the
ii
12
pp. 3 j to+q below). or was actually is written then in that discussed.
Scrolls, period
wrote
just
after dealt
stories material
purports material
contain thus
and is
on to Lucian
(pp. "7ef
below)
and Apollonius
(pp. 77 ff.
below)
Palestine
and the
Jewish
Sol.
NT Apocrypha because,
and its
discussed they
as we shall least -
'what
can we say
about
century
AD Palestine?
Texts
'what
tell first
century us,
material
and then
enquire
how useful
understanding
century
Palestine.
incantation-texts
(9)
One of the
went to
was to take
advantage
of this
of the
ii
13
(10) The exorcists ally do not with rely on their own strength divine
themselves
about
Babylonian prescribing
exorcism
a multitude
of different begin
direction
the patient
and to hold 1
a meteorite
hand.
The exorcist
then
had to
identify
the
offending
demon.
demonology
an almost
impress
he was in possession
of his
Or an evil
Ghost or an evil
Demon,
Be thou
me....
There
followed
the
equally
difficult
task
of knowing
ii
14
spiritual powers would be effective offenders. So there in combatling was an equally has 29 lines read this long
which
battalion list
of possible
invoking
The first
thou be exorcisedi (1 -
added to gives
simple approach to exorcism had other ' (16) it. And so for curing headache an direction kid,
on the right side
the
of a virgin
(it)
woman spin
it
on the
left,
s.even knots
of Eridu,
man .
(17)
sick7man.
(ostand
the water
the water-lees
the, earth".
seem to symbolise
sufferer
example of transference
which
upon
the
7nnn and
ii
15
Pour forth Bring forth the water a censer trickleth of the (and) Incantation; a torch, body away.
As the water
body trickle
whether
attended a climax
or of the
are -
"By Heaven be ye exorcisedl Earth The demon leaves been terrified be ye exorcisedl the by the person-not exorcist, a ban.
under
(or bind)
thou
R. C. Thompson at
some
exorcising
possess to the
as-7nankind principle
on this
Il
16
incantations of the it depends, drive since the priest evil invokes the help
gods to
spirits,
under
exorcisedl exorcisedt'
the
demon under
shall
Little
or nothing
is
said
about
the are
condition interest
of the Returning'Spirit
24)
"Perform
the
Incantation
of Eridu
I
That the
evil
Spirit, aside,
the
evil
Demon
spirit, (25)
a kindly
Genius
2.2.2 background
If
this
material century to
is
relevant
in providing ideas
to first
Palestinian it
show that
in this of ideas
material
survived
in time
from the
contact
11
17
it and the Rabbinic tablet texts material. For example in the habitats of demons are
between
Babylonian
the favourite
deserts,
mountains,
by man.
(27)
to live
"the
of howling
on exorcism
were known in Palestine show that with least but trade Babylon. also it is
But-a
was a road
world, only
routes (29)
A-long this
artifacts,
people
attending
brought
festivals
back ideas
(Mekilta
from
the Diaspora.
And in Jerusalem
2.3 Egyptian
Material
The material Papyri Thereoele_and the Bentresh potentially writings material first
a vast
span of time.
relevant we will is
to our study.
these
again
in helping Palestine.
on exorcism
century
2.3.1
Ancient Egyptian
PaPyri.
(32)
One -'medical'
papyrus
(33)
11
18
Egypt, the'Eberd Papyrus, (34) is a collection In the
-
from ancient
of incantations(35)
opening
It
incantation
, assuredly
there
Sais
come from
mother
me their
protection.
I in
"(Eb. P I). seems to be designed of medical to accompany any one that follow. nose-reads I have drink -
variety
incantations
out, thy
remedy against
protecting
against
(child)y thee...
thee:
illness
incantations
god is
confronted
synonymous for
shows just
the exorcist
to identify
himself
he sought
as a power-authority.
We also
and supporting
remedies
there
is
the direction
of
11
19
can be transferred (cf. LVII). from the person's head to that of medication or p. l, +Cabove) 37)
migraine
of the fish
and incantation
was designed
to some external
The Edwin Smith Papyrusl(38) as the Ebers Papyrusq in exorcism. "Another wind, ... not reach
of about
incantations
exorcising
the plague-bearing
who pass by may pass by to I am Horus who passes by (even) Horus, Horus, one, son of
against
despite I die
spoken by a man havihg the man pronouncing he makes the circuit outside,, (Ed. Again there and thus P XVIII:
a stick
hand as the
around
from entering'-'@
Smith
to be The (40)
supported
with
a god,
Horus. is heklthy
ii
20 a common beginning Breasted into fact later for a new recipe points out having that the same purpose this phenomenon "We -
is
also
papyri,
saying
a clear
papyri
in Greek times".
10685C,
(42)
a charm for of a
headachel
by calling continues
on the aid -
numbez! of gods, It
and then
woman, adversary of N, born The exorcist to recite called linen this of M".
identify
himself
with
is
a clay
upon. with
The exorcist
a drawing
head.
papyri
tell not
us about only
exorcism
in upon
also
these
or offending
addressed
god was asked to remove the offender. exorcist example in that his combined cited incantation
and activity.
of inscribed
head.
ii
(44) _ _
Last century
Rosellini
in a small
Khonsu temple is
telling a 28 line inscription of the journey (46) to Bekhten to cure of the god Khonsu and some officials of demon possession (line 11), The central
a princess
section
of the stele
god arrived Then-the nobles, upon his
reads:
in Bekhten chief before belly, in a full year and five his soldiers
"This months.
of Bekhten
6ameq with
He threw
welcome with
King'Usermare-Seteprere'(Ramses Then this Then he wrought chief of Bekhten. Then said this
of the
majesty
feast-day god
me and with
1 Then this
priest offering
were happening,
which
Khonsu-the-Plan-Maker-
of Bekhten Then
greatly.
Khonsu-the-Plan-Makerof Bekhten
he desired,
17b-23a).
(47)
According. story is
no evidence,
this
probably
case of individual
possession century
coming from the thirteenth and exorcism, (48) But the evidence supports BC. a later the story (fourth in the reign centuries of Alexander
date. IV and
to third
says it comes from the reign of Ptolemy VI (second century (49) BC). Breasted also dates this story in-the Persian or (50) If so, what does this stele tell early Greek period. before the time of us about exorcism just a few centuries Jesus? exorcism but is not the locus in of power-authority or physical thoroughly for aids the
in a god who is
at least simply
of Josephus'
to illustrate
exorcistic
ii
23
glorify Thirdly,
6 (see, Solomon and his God given wisdom p. 3 below). there is the speaking of the demon or spirit feature
below).
which
is also a familiar
NT period ( 81. Pe73 which
to the place
the cure
ending
is
this
ancient
material
in understanding
exorcism in first
century
Palestine?
That ancient
Egyptian
of Egyptian
through until
the coming of Christianity. of exorcism in that papyri of the in the with some are
to be found
second and following Edwin Smith Papyrus Horus and says "I
For example,
identifies
himself
am Horustt
(XVII3:: 13-15).
we often
and phrase.
sometimes
ii
of incantations
ancient
only
did
Egyptian spread
about
exorcism
conditions
Hellenistic
from evidence
(a)
In
AD Lucian
P- 7Z/ below),
of magical characters
(56)
He has
on controlling
against century,
Egyptians Egyptian
important as those
teachers
He describes
a few obols
sacred
lore
in
of the market
and drive
demons out
(58)
Egyptian
century
a footing
in Palestine.
Notably
25
even Jerusalem.
(59)
conditions AD indicate of
and around-the
there
a considerable
knowledge
Egyptian
and religion
in Palestine.
There
is plenty
population returned Not only etween as well
_A and carried
were social
hegemony over
The brother
marry
a Jew in Egypt.
There
is
evidence in
from Palestine
practices
exorcism
fifth
which lies
east of
amulets
later
(P-7, Z below),
exorcisms
first
like
century
those
PaJeatinian
Rabbis
performed
papyri.
(66)
26
Thus it on exorcism most probably In turn is reasonable for us to conclude not only survived that these ideas
in ancient spread
Egypt widely
but
of
the background
exorcism
2.3.3 material
Despite
known for
has been made of it has drawn attention in providing cosmology proceeds -but his
in NT studies.
to the importance
techniques.
work not
to reexarn-in
the papyri
specifically
There may be a number of reasons not been more thoroughly scholars readily recognize utilized the vast
why these
in NT studies. difference
to keep to the Gospels want seem so and and papyri ethos of (70) (b) Also the magical papyri are being the two apart. ignored lated because most of them have never into English, together. been fully trans-
been has in is English not and what (71) (c) And an important reason why used is inunder-
because standing
they
to be useful
ii
27
Is it then legitimate toallow the magical papyri to century
of the background
of first
associated
substantiate papyri
ideas
on exorcism
were already
than some the magical papyri may be earlier (73) instances think, and in specific some can be For example PGM LVII PGM XVI is, comes from the grounds a date dated
. on palaeo graphical
century to 6 AD.
that century
this
material
is is
useful
in
AD exorcism
the stability,
of the notions
the 'forward'
in this
stability
material.
of ideas this century.
Hull
we have to do is 'backwards'
show that
to the first
there
is
the line
"I
on there
are also
the lines
(V: letters" 249) founder and of medicines and (77) - h. 474ff. ). "I Heron This 10: 251; and am see also ... the inventor
ii
28
assuming the role of another more
powerful
P. 19 above)
Egyptian
texts aspect
papyri
(see
as Babylonian this
in
papyri,
a legacy
We have alr eady seen that used plants also and stones its etc.
has found
way into
the magical
papyri
example
PGMIV; 30008f. ).
was encountered. in our survey of ancient (see p-zo *x above) and it n. example XIII. passim*
A third,
represent
factor
of
which
earlier
indicates
times is
the magical
the
papyri
....... nature
do'
of
ideas
. .... composite
That
is,
it
older
material
has
to be said branches
over his
in front
behind
ancient in
practice
of using texts
tree
the Babylonian
(see po/3
a geographical as well
ii
29
spread of these ideas.
as a temporal
Direct in
inclusion
of older
material
be detected up numerous
thesepapyri.
details
from Jewish
upon Pharaoh
because he heard
The very structure for example PGM of some of the papyrij (82) . V_ with its ten sections for various effects simply juxtaposed, together within shows that material was probably collected (83) And importantly and preserved. it is clear that older
papyrus
material
begin in with
136,1379
138 all
out "lord"
he was
copying
earlier
papyrus.
last
few paragraphs
to show is
to the first
material
tel-I
30
us
about exorcism?
to 84
(a)
begin
by calling
of the call
in performing
the exorcism.
the incantation
PGMV: 11.171. 6f .
identified.
So PGM VIII:
of knowing
the name of the being was received PGM IV: 3075 looketh (see in
that
(b)
The description
sometimes
extends
to a brief
history
example PGMVIII:
(c)
The users
of these
some difficulty
in gaining
of the gods.
in PGM V: 258ff.
tell the enquirer "will into over
Pour out
of the black
a new unpolluted
vessel,
be eaten not
body, it with
from gnawing
mouths,
had to be frightened
and brought to
submission.
has an incantation
the demon to talk. I adjure the tongue you by the seal of Jeremiah continues which Solomon laid upon
The incantation
name so,
no avail
he may as well
speak.
(86) _
(e)
These points
so far
directly
lead
to a related
technique
evident
in
whose involvement
has
adjure you by the god of the Hebrewsq IUSOU, Iae,
Abrat5th, Aial
Abarmas,
Iabarau,
(87)
.
A very
common part
of
of another is
incantation
the exorcist
to first
call later
say "I
am Moses your
says "I
am the angel
goes so far
as to identify
II
32
he seeks to use.
(88)
(g)
there
words
to be repeated
to be performed
in an exorcism.
PGMIV: 3007ff.
"Take oil plant
has
made from unripe and lotus olivesl pith, together it with with the
ma tigia
and boil
saying
...
cited
involved
(90) amulets.
of lead
is written the incantation 0 pen. One of the purposes could be carried with
was that
incantation says
upon a piece it is
of tin... demon a
round
of every
to be trembled
which
he fears". to reproduce ).
purpose
the figures
of magical
In virtually
all
incantations
of every
common is
Abrasax. agreed
and generally
explanation
in Irenaeus value
numerical
is-365
33
of heavenly Palindromic intelligencZes in Basilides pleroma.
(93)
_ _
words were also popular - especially (94) The vowels were also used in a variety Alanathanalba. (96) of ways(95) often to produce a geometric shape.
perhaps
belonging
under
head-
mention used in
should
be made of
*Pxfcj
the Gospels
( see p. maf-below).
in particular which
has the word many times. found is "I 'binds to get adjure
The formula
the word is
you by ...
The meaning
+xt'5w. of
seems to be to in order
.............. power-authoriZ
These seem to be the most important techniques magical of the exorcists that
features
of the by the
are represented
papyri.
the OT was an important (97) theology, Christian as well as source for earliest (98) There informing the Jewish mind of the first century.
are two passages in particular which contributed to
first
century
Palestinian
thinking
on exorcism:
1 Sam.
p. 49 below;
ii
34
with regard ). to Solomon's prowess in magic
speculation (cf.
Ant. 8: 46ff.
passage, in
Psalm 91
seems to have
the exorcisms
extensively,
the onslaught
of demons.
suggest that
damaged but a number of. expressions (101) Thus contained curses against demons.
appears to have used, Ps, 91 for the (102) (Ploeg goes so far as demons. have here in 11 COPsApathe
to suggest
we might
'Davidic
Compositions' (103Y
refered
which
to in 11 QPsa, published
making music also over see
were "for
As we will
of Saul by David
and singing
Ant-7: 305)-
conclusions
are strengthened
by the
the Rabbinic
material.
The psalm is
ii
35
called 'Song for Demons? (J. Erub. 10: 26c), and 'Song Referring literature 'Song to Evil
actually for
the Stricken'
Spirits'
demons rather
exorcism
Church's
the combat
4: 6/Lk. (Mtt. 4: Ps. 91: 11 12 lof. where and are used interesting and appropriate context
have returned
Jesus
to them in his
name. As part
of the reply
Jesus
says -
"Behold,
serpents
And Ps-91: 13 has "You will young, lion This the is idea clearly tread on the lion and the adder, you will but trample and under I foot". and
of protection a firm
allusion.
in actual
Palestinee
this
BC
e of its
In'the large
book Tobit
sends his
son
Tobias
to recover
in Ecbatari% Raphael, relativexho One night a fish foot. during jumped Raphael
the angel
as a reliable Tobias.
river,
the water
to eat Tobias'
to catch a useful
heart questioned
medicament -
about
if
a demon or evil
trouble before
be troubled it
and he will
be cured"(6:
but
However
seven times
only
demon mentioned
ii
37
with her, each of the previous night. husbands Raphael had been killed Tobias take -
love
instructs
the bridal
and lay
and flee
again return"(6:
Raphael they also tells
17f. ).
Tobias All to pray this with his does, to remotest new wife before
sleep
together.
Tobias
parts
The prayer
of Egyptj
which
Raphael'said
protection
for God's
out in fact
to be a simple prayer
(8: 5-8), and has little took fish,
or nothing place
to do with
as a result
This
story
is
clear
evidence
that aids.
Jewish
healings
invblved
or physical is
of this
technique
disputed,
may have in
as the reference
included
the use of
the fish
wife)
rise
up, both
save you and have mercy on you"(6: So this about text exorcism tells us that first century
included
(112)
Three survey
factors,
this firstly
of relevant
of composition
and se co ndly means that it its
. (113) BC
which
because
of Jubilees
about cleanliness and separateness(115) (116) been Jubilees has and the solar calendar considered _ (117) However B. Noack a product of the Qumran community. and more recently in pointing James C. VanderKam are probably dissimilarities are differences
the Holy Spirit,
correct
out significant
priesthoodq
communal meal,
bathing, wars, and or ritual (118) These are differences that Jubilees is but not
the conclusion of
to be regarded
as a product
11
39
a document which they it took into their library, their for ally.
simply
as we have noted,
at points
reason
include in
in is
to the exorcism
some of the NT writers may have been aware of this (119) book. And there are in fact several points of contact (120) between the demonology of Jbilees and the NT.
It
is
part
of chapter
10 which
is
to us.
The sons of Noah are being Noah prays of all flesh, me, who
led
And hast
caused me to perish
has been Thy mercy to my soul; be lifted spirits destroy up upon my sons, rule over them
they
them from
the earth. But do Thou bless and multiply knowest me and my sons, that we may increase And Thou of these spirits,
and replenish
these spirits
them fast
which are
in the place destruction on
these
in order
to destroy. for
them not have power over from henceforth and for ever-
the sons of
the righteous
to bind
However
of the demons says let some of them remain and do all before that left me, and I shall to me,
to my voice, if
not be able
my judgment,
(10: 8).
to remain with
Noah all
the angel'3
medicines
"for
he (God) knew (the sons of Noah) would in righteousness" the ange2s not walk (10: 10). on
intrUCtions
kind
of medicine"
preventing book,
the evil
from hunting
Noah's
Noah handed
story not
single in for
patient,
and evil
spirit(s), it
the control and rehabilitation I (b) The story centres around cf-10: under 3,17). control And the mean is not
individual
(5: 5;
incantations
or cultic
prayer. of Noah begins (10: 39 see above) activity with w4ose sons. in This a brief
he prayer
recitation aid
Lstory of the
of the God's
feature
the MeVcO
Papyri (see p.. Z? above). ends with from is a mild threat (10: 3)-
they
the earth"
The threatening in
sought
has also
the place
in the
NT (mtt. 8: 29; Jude 6, see p. 140below). (e) The plea with which Noah ends his prayer "And let them
(10: 6) is
TT
42
other exorcism stories where the demon is expelled
not
to return
to be noted
response
in defence with
of his
be dealing
in the Synoptics.
Though it
a defence is
complete in the
fo4eniency
power is
leniency
have ended at
what appears
together herbs
heal
witnesses special
individuals
but of all
He knewthey
in uprightness,
in view is certainly
of thisl-such considered
healing,
a second best
method of exorcism.
11
43
In concluding life the section on Noah with the children wherein is (v-17) "And -
(i)
in his
on earth
he excelled
of the
maniiest
of Noah. that the control of the demons by repercussions of the point attrib-
'event'.
'exorcism' This
given
be bornein
the significance
uted to Jesus'
exorcisms
(seepp-22IFF. below).
(121)
of this
material
has at
times
been consjus
every
literature
arose
in the middle
of
used right
up to the
There
are
two
passages
in
particular
in
this
I literature
which
we need to examine.
of the Apocryphon is devoted to Gen. 12-15- Incolumn XX recounts the courtiers' description
11
44
and his for Sarah's night taking of Sarah as his Then a spirit his wife.
protection.
to all his
househbld. he was
And he was unable with Eventually it necessary out, her two years
to approach
finds
the
it who that
turns
to help sister,
on hearing to
Abraham was summonedo He was told from all the land this of Egypt; evil spirit and
him)...
my hands on
spirit (1235
is
an important as I know,
story
as far
the earliest
relates-the
ability
to control (Abraham) in
and expel
individual a little
later
in our period
11
45
It is also to be noted in cultic that the source of power-authority incantations
is
not
to be found
traditions
of amulets,
The success
of the exorcist
went
the
flaying
instance
of healing
laying
(124)
document
the exorcism
is
described Primarily
was expelled in
1 QM. XIV where God 'expels' H. C. Kee says that a technical te= for
Satan's
spokesman, submission,
probably A in in
introducing
the sigwith
the exorcism
To begin
'driving able
away' to establish
spirits rule in
in God being
"Blessed
of salvation
ii
with
Quo
the people
He has delivered!
Cof
Thy people,
7 Thy name, 0 God of mercies, praise. the Covenant with our father.
Thou hast
favours
on the remnant
During
all
fus he has riot made Thou has driven--his far Rather plan evil Satan than from Z"Thine this portraying in spirits
stray
Z. -of destruction2 7 110m xiv:,; F). of the redemptive of Belial 'destruction' the people out is and the of of not
elect. the
triumph
'driving
which is
how Belial I
driven
(b) with is
What Keels
interpretation in
does is
to equate
exorcism
of Satan that
But this
in the Genesis of
Apocryphon, ) there is
no hint
exorcism
God drives
the
ii
47
of destruction from the elect.
spirits
(c)'I-V
(127)
that
extend
On the basis
the tra33 lation
overcome
the enemies of
and others,
have noted, 'jSla is (128) Thus we need of elf(Ird ORY 'OV4, 'to exorcise 1.029) If
some sense of
of the lines-previous
to line
29 we come to
a clearer
should
understanding
considerably
but,
following plague is
expected
to happen in in line
One of
the possible
As this well suits
tran
lations
of
of 'rebuke'
would be to expel.
in the word, spirit
(131)
the element
(132-)as we
as describing
the expulsion
of the evil
suggest it
thought
as the correct
in
understanding
exorcism.
of what Qumran
was*happening
that
is
of interest
to us is fragment
(4QPrNab. ).
(133)
The entire
ii
48
"The words of the prayer pttered by Nabunai king of
reads
Z'the Babylon,
with an evil
7 king, great.
ulcer
in Teiman by decree
High God_7. I was afflicted years... fwith an evil pardoned ulcer'7for my sins. seven He was a of Judah,
and an exorcist 2-children Jew from among the and he saidl, and exaltIthe I wrote 'I this: 'Recount
this.
toCglorify And
High God'.
ulcer
in For seven
to the
Cbronze Z-I
and clay, 0
believedl
relates
a similar
story that
of originally
concerned by that
replaced
and that his name was (135) This Nebuchadnezzar. prayer of of Danielic stories and the unknown
to a cycle
(136)
exiled
to be Daniel..
In the Prayer Vermes(137) has translated as (138) While as Dupont'exorcist' rather than Idiviner,.
linguistically,
(139)
ii
49
is not the most natural tdiviners, this is translation translation occurs that in There there of the term. (140) in Dan. 2: 27, is to be preferred that that The and it here.
it
noun, is
literally
probably there
Also
simply (141)
sins*
Thus 4QPPNab. is
2-7-3 It
one exorcism this kind
has only
about
of healing is related
in Palestine
The healing
and is
told
as a result to
of the
many gifts
Abraham (and Sarah) uses no mechanical the practice no significance healing. an evil
Abraham save
aids
exorcism,
of laying in
on of hands.
the exorcism
outside
understood
of Nabonidus
a healingg
or incantations,
related
particular
individual,
) Daniel. perhaps
...
.............
Antiquitatum
Biblicarum
........
is
to us for
we are about
comes from Palestine (143) NT was being written. "And at that from Saul, time
and from
away
and an evil
David,
and he played is
that
spirit
and silence
before
spake,
which
was stretched
the upper was called earth. rain should And it according bring that
food
And after
whereas
remember Hell
(lit.
Or is
be mindful
it not
of Tartarus)
thee I sing
wherein-thou
to hear unto that
walkedst.
by that which
before out
many?
of a rebounding
echo in
the abyss
ii
51
thy thee, a time creation whereof Vorn? was I aM born, he that But that new womb shall rebuke
be born after
of my loins
Sau'
sung praises,
For
the purpose
we should
draw
that
oppresses
not said
to be sent
said to be created by
and will
see again
music
feature
of the healing
period.
(d) Whht was sung by David is said to be a psalm. I
(e)
According
to LAB David's
singing
took in the
place
at night. darkness In
not only
to The by
a story
focusing not
on the creation
directed
to any invoked
power-authority
spirits.
ii
52
The third spirit paragraph that of the chapter begins by reminding creation he
(g)
the evil
I
as he is
a second order
created
should
out of a rebounding
not be injurious.
echo to walk
in Hell
(h) line
if
it
intereiting
thee
which the
resoundeth
I sing
many? "
impression
'psalm'
or paragraph
was commonly
used in exorcism. (i) The concluding words against the demon are to be noted. prophecy rebuke that the demon. identity
The ultimate
weapon against
the demon is
will
of this
most likely
person who is to. have power over demons, but the (147)
candidate is Solomon.
to build century of
of exorcism
and to
exorcists
contemporaries,
Lk. 11: 19) and Mark (9: 38; cf. Lk. 9: 49) agree. consider three passages:
Ik. 9: 49-50,
ii
53
2.9.1 Mtt. 12: 7/Lk. 11-09 has the saying, by whom do your ... If I cast
out demons by Beelzebulq As this it in mean first saying that probably we probably
them out? ". (149) goes back to the historical-Jesus sons cast have here some evidence of exorcists
century
Palestine*
Exactly
who at Am'
were
has
been
a matter
of
debate.
think "your
that people".
But others
refers
reference below)
(151)
However, as the
(see p. 201
may be redactional
we cannot
Jewish exorcise
exorcists
is
not
elaborated
-.
by someone or something.
exorcists around
may have had a simple calling upon, by which limits or at least to cast out
to either is excluded
In Mk'9: 38'(cf*tk.
q: 4q)(152)
John is
said
to
to Jesus -11eacher
out demons
an important
ii
54
if the story arose in the early Church we may not have but in another part of
for
evidence
of exorcists world.
in Palestine
the ancient
the early Church origin of this story (154) -1 by the that the supported notion vocabularys on is assembled around the catch phrase fin my
While the pericope it still may indeed have coalesced
phrase, origin.
The vocabulary
t 7 0v,OIA -cr ev -rc.
is
of particular
and Z0 l<
interest in 9: 38 is
ly
is whether in
this
vocabulary
resurrection
communtiy
or whether
plausible
situation.
(a)
The phrase
*YZWR-r(
(156)
denoting
characterises
or accompanies
the act,
to the Greek manner of thinking) been found has not does not mean that a Christian independently in secular, notion Firstlyq 'the
(157)
this
(see (cf. 3019 PGM. 31 p. was efficatious a god, --IV: .......... J) 46f 8: (see 13F. below Secondly, Ant. above) and Fp. a . in healing Deissmann dative came across the phrase,
TI
S
without
IrSAE43S ;
&
but with
the
alone,
c'Gv-r-*v
va uct. r ,
c 0059)
k
ii
55
of this that "it Deissmann rightly rejects which etc., first ' into Cremer's introduced
says that
"the
use of
Ovo^cc
Jesus
in
the
its of demons could hardly have antedated (161 ) The force of this argument Church". for, if Jesus was the successful material surprising
use in is diffthe
to see,
exorcist
Gospels believe
should
where the sons of Sceva were very'quick of Paul Acts as a possible source
8: 18f.
a potentially
of power-authority.
conclusion in
regarding-
Iv -rca ovqaarrt av Lr
the early
the phrase,
the Church
it and -
would
way of expressing
the thoughts
(b) makes it
A look
il
56
Church. It its is worth use very quoting well. the concrete so strongly felt Kittel at some length for
early
he summa izes 11
the connection
processes
no noun ever
came into
use correspondhas
to express it is no
and not
in is the word used only Q`(KoXvv-exv accident (163) that there is agreement as to its uses the, Gospels, that in all ship four signified other Gospels, by it and that they restrict Jesus. the relationIn the in which kt%owS
to the historical
Epistles
expressions falls
f. ff v9 VALaL
on relationship (164) , ,.
to the exalted
that
"Thet with
subject.
of v-38
is
association
as testimony
to a post-Easter
evidence
origin
of
However with
overwhelming
in favour
used of following it
at least,
'being Jesus,
of the post-Easter
(c) that
so far
is is
leading
the origin
pericope
to be located
11 ministry helps apply of the historical-Jesus. this to conclusion. the One further That is,. in small his point attempt Luke
57
to
Most-Easter
situation,
altered
Mark'sus*',
Mark's
applicable
there.
after (16T)
this
conclusion
is
right
then
this
is But name
evidence it tells
on exorcism is us that
in first the
century
exorcists
were using
of another
(poverful)
exorcist
as a source
of power authority.
2.9.3
to exorcists
The third
19: 13-19, of
cannot
Palestine exorcists
in Ephesus.
However they
to be Jews,
represent
on exorcism
involved need not of the exorcists (170) Nor do we need to deal with the moment. identity
difficulties
in the passage.
(171)
The
This
(19: 13).
have would exorcists who could (.172) to the Ephesian pagan temple been attached of Artemist(173) healing. things with associated a goddess among many other be to
11
58
These 'door to door' exorcists had taken up the name of
Jesus into it
their
incantations I
This papyri
is interesting (175)
and the form in which they used (174) c. MG-XoS 'Ijo-oC-v VPqs-r; ov ov
" is by... you very comm n (176) 'albove). But I can find prior to Nk-5: T and
of this
incantations
commonly used in other AD. For example to him, 'How often 1 Kings shall I
contexts
you,
that
in the
clear; to
name of the
- to swear adjure by--. or (177)
correctly
cause
Its
pdrti6ular
meaning
reference
the Babylonian
climax -
of an exorcism
often
by the line
exorcisedl exorcised" that powers of Heaven and 078) ban, or a tapiP. this is the way in which the more likely placed at the in the
made all is
also
incantations, is called
point
supernatural
upon to
on behalf
ii
59
If these conjectures in using because then what the sons of (180) the t'&J was not imploring o/OK, are correct of Jesus, but rather using Jesus' name
to put a supernatural
restriction
on the
demons.
It
that
the
formula
"I -
adjure
you
by the Jesus whom Paul preaches" the to exorcist impress recited and terrify the history the
is -
of the type
in which
of the invoked God in order (181) demon*. This is an important the ancient exorcists used.
question-relating
to the methods
included,
usually
at the they
documented
(cf.
For example
Christians
(182)
phrase
"Jesus
said
to mention
activities is
of power
authority.
What'they
are doing
him as he is presently
known (KjP6-rircc-
present
tense).
that
this
is
a can be
'glorification'
ii
6o
where the name of Jesus is mentioned (183) For example Justin phrase. along Martyr
on Jesus
-under-'Pontius-'-Pilate,
to us*lLgl.
parts
references details
appear
credal,
or are name
This writers
present
case,
of Pilate.
So to of these 19: 13 is
conclude
this
it those adjure
is
probable like
exorcists' previously
(Perhaps) a
use in
understanding
confirmed
by v-15, "But
I know; 'Jesus know, Paul I them, and answered evil spirit (186)_ defence. the demons (successful) but who are you?,,,
us that
the exorcists
were using
11
61
to put a supernatural restriction was the-name through on demons. of a renowned identificatory self-defence.
'of power-authority
a careful
2.1 .0 Josephus
(18T)
Although
later
than
to be of
activities are of
exorcist,
retelling
Before any
in that
detail
at these
stories
we need
says
apologetic
further
on in the
to the will
laws that
have
laid
down, prosper
in
all
things
beyond belief,
and for in of
--their--revard proportion
whereas, observance
11
62
these laws, things (else) practicable imaginary bec=e good thing they
impracticable,
and whatever
strive
to do ends in irretrievable
purpose is pagans Josephus is
disasters"
(=.
1: 14).
to Old
clear
treatment
of his
readers
nothing
will with
appear the
majesty is here
indeeds the
in keeping
universe"(1:
in the
suggests
rationalistic himself to
accomodating
heathen
tendency story
is
example in his
of the flight
by their birds to
accustomed settled
more
skim the
in the food
Hebrews' devised
them as the
over
against
this
does not
always
the from the the water story of example stories miracle % in believe he does 33-38) that has and : no explanation rock (Iql (190) (events God's the miraculous,, providence which manifest -
li this rationalizing appeal Tendenz cannot tendency (for is be ignored accompanied example in Josephus. by the This
63
to Scripture in part
9: 46,208,214; giving
at least,
besides
words,
does shift
incredibility
of some of the
general
objective,
this
selfconsciousness delight
about
the
in the
his
age.
Or in other
words,
as conscious viewed
representations With
to his
exorcism
story
that
in telling
knowledge
illness effect
So Josephus
Eleazar, his
of mine, and a
which
11
64
one of the -roan smelled roots it, prescribed drew out the by Solomon, and then, his the
and, when the man at once fell never -. to come back into the to him,
the
Solomon's
a littl4
went out of the man 9\0 overturn spectators that he had left
the man"(Ant.
neglect story
the
question
of the with
exorcism
story
of miracles tradition"
of the
possible of the
here to Synoptic
discussion we will
of the attempt
origin
that
contribution between
story
in Josephus
(194) points of
between this
Gospels. intentions to
chapter
we will
of the
in relating
ii
65
him and highlight their interest in him (for example intention
glorify
Josephus
has a similar
He concludes
the narrative
above:
revealed,
of the
surpassing
(Mk. 9: 26) the down as dead. Tnan at once fell in Mark Jesus "and never said enter
demon leaves
the
sufferer
says that
In the
demon never
to
In the Antiquities
Solomon's this
no parallel exorcisms
in these
Eleazar
on: the
power-
ii
66
Fuller similar has shown that to the Gospel the form of this stories. Josephus (195) exorcism story
(e) is
these
points
of contact
conclusions,
we need to set
differences (a)
between
In the Jesus
tradition (note
Jesus-the-Exorcist story, it is
Mk. 1: 2? f. ). who is
not Eleazar
on centre
stage
composer of
incantations. the NT stories Eleazar "ring not of Jesus only uses its
difference
between is that
a finger
which
had under
se4ne
of the roots
prescribed
This physical
(c)
An important stories
the mention
of water. is
The Gospel
parallel
of the pigs
of this in-the
some of that
discussion,
the pigs
anticipating that
we can note
the cured
ii
67
in below). those stories (eg. Mk-5: 1-20, the individual on which see pp.
interest
or no significance.
Josephus methods
Eleazar
came from
there
relationship we might
of this
vocabulary stories.
characteristic
there
are points
of contact
and those
between they
we should independent
possible,
the Gospel
have to explore
possibility
as the story
appears is
independent
to ask what it
in the NT to
incantations
ii
68
of
aids this
of
under in
enacted and
Fourthlyt exorcist-took
down. Fifthly
the
to the person
a 'strong
the reason
to be useful in this
of Solomon's section
area.
and wisdom which God the ancients, to excel all and men in
Solomon that
he surpassed
8: 42). lt(Ant. ... praise is what he has to say about which includes exorcism -
of Josephus' expertise
in the field
him knowledge
of the art
used against
the benafit
illnesses with
by demons drove
never
to return
200) (Ant. 8: 45) Then follows Solomon's skill the exorcism, using Solomon's name, illustrating. Josephus gives
as an exorcist.
The conclusion
ii
69
story confirms this suggestion (Ant. 8: 49, story quoted p. 6f
this
aboVe).
the Eleazar
shows that
exorcisms
of a successful
of the spectators.
2.10.3 to us in story
that is
is his
of particular retelling
the works
16: 14ff.
"O.. the Deity when the divine prophesy. disorders ation other with harp, torment
and passed
began to
by strange
spirits that
and strangling
the-physicians search
spirits over
and strike
a search
a man. David 11
trouble
assailed
him, his
physician
restored
to himself
We ask of this
story
70
in first exorcism
Like told the story
century
Palestine?
dismissed this one is
we have just
in order
character, although
in this incantations
of the
also
the exorcist.
is
said
Firstly
the he that is a
Saul
and it
secondly his
with
strange
and evil
affect notion
breathing.
The leaving
encounter
it
again in
that is related jilvolves David Icharming
the evil
spirits.
that
charming
away is It
said is
mean- the
individual.
But the
11
71
of the head has already in their placing been seen in the Babylonbranches
exorcisms,
or holding
tamarisk
In the light
determines it is
member which (203) members of the body, in the story of Saul towards Josephus the head.
understood
the
cure
is
described (cfthat
by Josephus
as Saul
Lk-15: 17)-
himselft. those
'beside
himself'
close is
to Jesus sought
him home (Mk. 3: 21). *Ef; w-T, 7 to a mental of Jesus' condition,, friends
relation thoughts
the
charge is
(3: demon 22, see p. 21/below). a Mark, one writer of our period, that
the two
restored
probably
an exorcism
has taken
2.11
The Rabbinic
Material
(206)
A major assigning
problem
in dealing
with layers
this
material
is There
dates
to the various
of tradition.
in assieing
ideas to
We ask the now familiar material Particularly references from them. tell us about
question in first
'what
exorcism
century
to healing
0 imcantation
techniques
over
between
no portion
a wound
us little
century
Palestine.
One of the best known first century rabbis is (210) He has a direction for exorclsm Johanan ben Zakkal, 2ollel that resembles elements texts with person), the spirit is (for in both the Tobit (6-8) story and
(see p,, /JiLabove). herbs burn them under him with It (PR 40b). him (the water, (211) among the b. Yoma.
of exorcism times
represented
many times
of later
of prescriptions
11 2.11.2 successful Both rabbi to perform the demon "Ben Temalion, 17b). entirely below). get outl Ben Temalion, get outl On the other exorcists hand there seem to have been different.
73
and direct
(b. Meil.
expulsion force
of the exorcist
2.11-3
first
Another well
known rabbi
is rabbi Hanina ben Dosa of and second centuries (212) Galilee. There is a story*associated with him which further of confirms a phenomenon that world. Hanina was believed to be part one.
the first
century
concerning learning',
you in I would
and his
have put you in danger". Hanina "If replies I am of account in heaven,, I order you never to
regions
for leniency and she is permitted
This
is
not
an exorcism
but
it
shows that
in first
ii
74
Palestine it was thought that conversations took
authority
standing notable is
or relationship for
with
leniency
and the
request
2.11.4
is a healing
see p. 166below). to be noted. son fell he
from a distance In this "It ill, might upper them: hour drink connection
of Hanina, is
When he saw them, he went to the When he came down, he said has left him ... It to
was at that a
the fever
of water"
the rabbinic to us it
material
century
commands to perform
exorcisms. to control
between healing
2.12
Lucian
of Samosata
(214)
This
pagan satirist
at a
11
75
in the ancient in the rise and fall of (215) His How to Write world. that he regards as
in up the defending probably Philops. useful 17)-
makes clear
the exorcisms
Lucian
is (cf.
of religion
reason
are potentially
to us,
That
potential 16 is
is
probably
actualised
because
in Philops.
so close
The full
as follows. my part, I should like to ask yqu what you say men from so manifestly. Imows about in it, their terrors I need the Syrian how many he of the mouths with and
to those
who free
possessed
moonand foam;
nevertheless,
them as they
and asks:
this
himself
is
ii
76
silentl but the spirit answers in Greek or in the country he comes from, the man; he does not Indeed, I
into and if
him, he drives
him out.
apparent story
that
there told
and those
falling
at the
the converstion
the onset is
conversation
between
an echo of Jesus'
On the other
of Jesus not
8: 19) but
and Ithreateningt
(seeppvoRbelow)-
story fill
or report
tell
us
to view
beside In this
11
77
between of the
regarding binds
a supernatural
restriction
the exorcist
phrases
As a result then is
not altogether
clear
a-c earlier (ov and -4ve'r-ri) that the exorcist (g) is takes hold for
coming out,
2.13
Apollonius
of Tyana
(220)
c. 96-98AD)
about of
217 AD
Domna, wife
Septimius Philostratus
of philosopher-friends
2-13.1
the subject
As the Life
there is
is about a century
as in
removed from
the Gospels -
the relationship
between
Apollonius
and the
11
78
him. points of the This is particularly the Life Julia evident has with in the the in
of contact Gospels,
in that
Domna placed
hands some memoirs by Damis a disciple-of (Life Iz3). career Philostratus of Apollonius was also able to use a
treatises
Finally
Philostratus
cities
where'Apollonius
then time
the Life
represents it
views
in views a is
represents suggests
to determine. of Apollonius
Conybeare
Damis,
Philostratus
the
aretalogi of his
age, to
set
himself his
embellish
exaggerate
and his
supernatural
evident
reputation of -having
and defend
ii
79
In relation to our particular Philostratus have handled study on exorcism we can us some of Apollonius
note
a few points
says that
Damis of the people and law - those and those people has the
discredited
and condemned
who sell
which
wear to gain
In Life
Philostratus
himself real
from those
that
Philostratus misleading
activities.
Apollonius
1: 2 Philostratus
mentions
of severe being
discharged
from heaven.
Then Philostratus;
the works of Anaxagorms as the results are the very for same people
of his
who would
wish to discredit
is to represent
his that will miracles as somewhat skeptical so (223) Thus Apollonius probable. refuses to believe
ii
Oo% ou
are older
than the
earth
(Life his
and Philostratus
voices
own doubts
about Apollonius
raising
a dead girl
(Life
iv: 45).
do these
factors
have for It
Philostratus' probably
individual will If
exorcism at least
stories? heighten
Philostratus technique-,
the
simplicity
Philostratus
the great
of Apollonius
be presented
spectacular.
known exorcism
story
in the Life
(IV: 20)
which he is
Apollonius
speaking looked
that
perpetrates
insult,
knowing
demon cried
he would leave
possession
some definite
that
that
moved gently
of which was a hubbub and a clapping The lad is also rubbed his described
eyes as if
"coming as
ii
81
Tiv 1OW-ror
r
a phrase already
shown to be
associated
story
with
ends with
Apollonius
Can ve suggest from the reports and which demoniac, elements other
vhich
parts
of this
story incident
of those
have been appended? The distress and the simple technique story that
of Apollonius
of an exorcism
exorcists
of Peter late
(see-p. 87 below).
and from material an unreliable This of (see p. 6+ I do not in the possession kind of
as we will
(ppqRO see
quite
indication proof
of notions
of exorcism
may stem from the more simple a bowl of water But at least we can use it century.
of proof
saying
a widely
in an exorcism.
82
austerity
is so obviously Apollonius it
in line in this
with way
Philostratus'
to portray
(see p. -71 hbove) that we cannot be sure that from Philostratus' own-hana.
2.13.3
Another
story
with
Apollonius
and that is
the boy
another
which
in tone.
cheeks as well
the boy does not know her. frightened steep brought courage, Upon this it gave
threats
to her of
places,
and the death of her son, she has not Finally Apollonius says "Take
him when he has read this., from his it appears, pocket was of an of the and
Apollonius
out a letter
to the woman... " The letter, to the ghost kind. all that
0 and containeqthreat,
(-irxJ\A -. u) efficacy
of the
on reading
the letter
the boy.
This reputation
story
isagain
clearly for
intended
of Apollonius
the incident
11
83
between the sage and some Indian wise men.
discussion
Thigrstory
tells
us of
exorcism
at
a distance,
of
talking
demons and of the use of a written demon. Both of these known in the ancient setting Philostratus things world
incantation
to rid
from its
of the
demon/demoniac, those
technique n otions
which would
represent
century
Palestine.
of Solomon
(224)
2.14.1
This
long
spirits By means
earth.
the transcendent
works of the
Telling
to nought"(
It
is hardly
surprising
then that
this
pseudepigraphon
is used to help construct the background to NT demonology and (225) is how'legitimate this? What date should But exorcism. be assigned to this Testament? And if it-is late, is it a
ii
84
work independent on it, of the NT, or Christian thinks (226) that and it is a
Jewish
dependent Christian
recension
book.
as a Christian
work incorporating
Jewish
material.
with
there
are
on Christian
71 has the
I shall
quickly
(cf. 104b and 122). If there were only isolated that units of Christian tradition
postulate
a Christian
to an already into
existing account
(Jewish)
and footnotes (a as
H15
/Mtte12: (cf. demons Mk-3: 2?, of demon describes (cf. Eph. 6: 12). lightnings" (cf.
11: 15)world-
72 a corporate of this
Conybeare explains
this
evidence
by saying
that
ii
85
"the
writer
of the document was a Hellenistic employed the same phraseology (229) of the New Testament'le seems to be so familiar that the Test. Sol. with
was written
up material
For example
9 24 the demon Asmodeus says "By Raphael, throne the archangel that stands before the put
and all
of a fish
dependent This
upon Tobit
6: 1-9,18
(see
depend .ence,
as well
2 etc. ),
118,123
9 128
Pt. 2: 6f. );
to the problem
of
is a Jewish Christian
on the NT, but using material and notions from (232) the NT. McCown has shown that the Test. Sol. third-century AD. (233) In turn
ii
86
that it is only with the greatest'of data for This are
exorcism
to those
elements
need to be shown
to be more antique
than
the document
us about is
exorcism carried
The Test.
of conversations confirms
what we see from other that demons and exorcists and the-
was believed
conversations in the'Test.
modelled of a ring
used to control
demons
(cf.
antiquity both
83,90,92ff.
of this
of the
was
technique
ancient
9 22 and 24 (see p. t5 above) belief In' in the efficacy example) alone, but of incense Solomon
51 (for
the legion
Although
there is a slight
possibility
of dependence on
ii
87
does confirm knowing and clarify the notion contained power to the does
Solomon's
thee
to with
thy hosts"
Hence in
"'Tell
69 (for
me by what angel
55 74-103).
Sol.
is
an important Church. is
witness
in
of help
in Palestine. between
We see from
conversations
of knowledge
of the demor& name, the strong names in the the NT era into
incantations represented
through present
document.
ii
88
2.15 The NT Apocrypha (234)
There
stories
in
this
literature
background late date,
stories. in which
as appropriate (235)
this
But the
stands,
elements
of these
their
may have
these
'fantastic'
elements
'apostolic-age' while
and so worked
them into
may not have expected to behave as portrayed (wrongly? ) that our in the the
of their Acts
they
wouldhave of these
Consequently
a discussion earlier
dependence literature.
on, or relationship
2.15.1
The Acts
..........
of Peter.
....
This
piece
of literature
comes from the last decades of the second most likely (236) The theme of these Acts is confrontation century. between Peter through his his (Magus) Simon and Peter to demonstrate than Satan that God
is'greater
and Simon
ii
89
In chapter 119 just before he confronts Simon, Peter
turned "and saw in the crowd a man half demon. And Peter that by Peter then says in the laughed, laughing, said in whom to him. openly -
was a most wicked 'Whoever you are, to all This who stand
show yourself
whatever
man and do him no. harm; who stand and caught in by. " hold
marble
the courtyard
the house,
and kicked
pieces'.! *
thing
that which
stands is
out
in this
story to
is
the
remarkably
similar
account
to find
evidence
stories
element
relationship
to life
the times
or what they
thought
to the apostolic
Ii
rather than the time of the setting for of the story, woman) to may be
90
in Peter's openly
call to all
who stand
there -
an echo of the Gospels, But the dependence probably not very notion should minimal close if
especially
Ik. 4: 35 (cf. Mk. 3: 3; 9: 19). on the Gospels for the wording held is is
after
confront Thirdlythe
and demons
with lack
an address of precision
uncharacteristic
of the stories
directly
address
incantational
traditions
preserved
(seeppr7ff.
of exorcists right
publication
in a Christian
to mind Lk. 4: 35 where the demon leaves the boy, is reasonable to suspect then that the
91 Fourthly
of the story or rings
it
that
is a noticeable
no mechanical
feature
or physical drive
of the first
aids like
part
hand$,
or mixturesare
to lie
force
charge as well
the slave
in Acts
ordering
of both
Thus, these
in
its
desire
reputation
characteristic
use of
'the
Jesus Christ'
as a source
of poweraids.
who relies
on no mechanical
of Peter
back into
the first
shows the maintainance were not particularly notably other the command to traditions is
of exorcistic confined
which tradition, of
to the Christian
'show yourself'. in
The influence
evident
in which
the demon is
addressed
the destruction
The Acts
of Andrew.
No agreed Acts
date
has been by G. of
fragment (239 )
of these
publishes
(240)
encratite half
with the Acts contacts (241) place these Acts second century.
is
an exorcism
extended
over
five
a dialogue the
demon.
While
he was speaking
four
"presence
(page 9 lines
"0 Varianus,
what have I done to you that god-fearing him to the an extended aid
follows
conversation of their
involving
preserved to
difficult
at times
determine
speakers
But is
conversation
of
exorcism
and. exorcism
11
93
it is the exorcist here, who does most of the the speaking. say as the is
to our In fact
information
an earlier
a complete
(page
10 lines
an attacking
10 line
of this is
section
intrusion of another
an earlier
by the the
poor
seems to 13 lines
history
of the
'height',
better
of Andrew than
extended of this
'secondary (245)
Gregory this
kind
was altered
transmission.
of Andrew to the
material.
of the
an unconnected expect
we might
but,
to the
champions
Having
praised it
virtue is
to the you to
already
he may enter
service
27ff. ).
'command' may have been added in the Also the first force half of the to suspect to any of
Andrew's words so lack the authoritative exorcists that actual it we have so far met that is a pure literary lbractice of exorcism. creation
we are inclined
having no relation
to Andrew's
command saying
that
he has of the
departure be well is
demons seems, even in the Gospel stories, to (246) The only suggestion to the contrary established. of the addition this to. his tradition story in Lk. 4: 35. (see p. 11Z here may simply by the possible be a conflict story
in Luke's That
aspect is also
of the
indicated
(page 9 lines
of the
off
his
21f. ). We there is
to this
practice
though (Life
In view
of Andrew relies
11
95
our purpose in discussing layers this story has not been to Nevertheless we have
various just
probably
more than
a simple
who Was accompanied later are still emendations, visible. the of the
exorcism
There exorcist's
is
dramatic
of
Beyond this
us back to the techniques The one clear the mention praying with its to glimpse
and notions of
exorcism with
in the
NT period. times is
continuity
earlier demon to of
in the
'secondary'
cause a demon to is
The contact
probably
to be found clothes.
in the
mention
of the healed
exchanging
2.15.3 about
The Acts
the beginning
to be placed at of Thomas are probably (249) of the third century and contain a are of interest to us.
number of stories
that
42ff.
a beautiful plight
vornan confronts
and for
most part
confidence
persons
ii
96
fleeing from a potential Accordingly a method of healer then first this but actually asking in the
their
healing.
element
may reflect
century
Palestinian
exorcism.
tirade
of listing
demon
(S
44)
of addresses
also
of this him")
Christian the
borrowing demons'
of lir; ting
to be certain
of subduing
the phrase
against A little
at the
leave
in Mtt-3:
follows which,
virtually heavily
unconnected dependent
62ff. vife
) and
-b
ii
--1-.
97
illness. But no other dealing element with in the story would The
an exorcism
story.
of the
them help"
In with lie
chapter
T3ff.
there
is
a highly
long behind
recoverable.
involves.
the the
a courtyard 104).
then
there
be propitiation sparing
or sparing
or compassion.
In the name
of Jesus, (1
Although
side"
75).
to
is speech of evil. a
to the power of Christ which has been given exalting to life strange Christ and the story tells of
and his
destruction
primarily
a collection
'hymns I to Christ
Apostle.
The last
story
in the Acts
(9 Thomas of
170) is
ii
98
brief (252) was possessed exorcism story. One of the sons of
relatively Misdaeus
so that
to Misdaeus than in
believing
promises kindly
Misdaeus
in his
goodness,
towards. him.
he took -
-found from the tomb and attaching in Jesus and his son
no bones - they
son confessed
his
faith
was healed.
This tells
short
story
is
interesting
simply that
because
it
at least
some-
continued in
to experience,
of healing
the use of pagan methods js6 the simplejof 'the namet of Jesus.
This (253)
survey
of the exorcism
in
the is helps
However
the continuation
of the picture
the NT period
emerging
of our discussions.
99 (sometimes willingly)
exorcist force should
confront
each other,
that
the
address/abuse (verbally
the personal
authority), sufficient
without
mechanical the
or physical conversation
to effect
tconversion'
of the sufferer.
as 'proof' of Peter,
and the'exchange
new ones in
of Andrew we probably
reflected of
practices rather
the Acts
us no reliable stories
to the
project
back,
notions
appropriate
to the Apostles
venerate.
2.16 Conclusion
chapter
and exorcists
which
was of potential to
ii
100
Sol.
because'of all
the continued
existence'of
notions
and practices.
impression variety
given
in
this that
the great
of forms
have been Imown and used in Palestine But there may be a pattern in all this
in Jesus' evidende.
Firstly there
we sur7eyed
............ who were successful ...... .... they said and/or (Ant 8: 46-49) did.
particular of this
The best
example
saw it and
in the-Rabbinic
material
exhibit
of exorcism.
importance of both
in these
exorcisms
he could
rely
upon.
In order
the demon or the god the exorcist and'histories went so far of the'demon as-to identify for example (as god a3id
descriptions
himseif
powerful
iindividual
Hermes or Moses in the PGM) or even the*invoked also in the PGM). Most of these using kinds
of exorcisms to put a
involved
11
101
restriction?
on the demon, by speaking the demon could the demon would be made speak 19: 15;
and plead
leniency
Usually
of activity
brew.
The activities
prescribed
by some texts
were designed
not merely
the demon from the person was then poured or particular '
on diagrams employed.
was sometimes
there
that done
were
not because
The earliest it is
Apocryphon
extant
rel4tes
the ability
demons not
to particular individual's
to a particular
at the level
.the of in
story
Tiede(255)
has
the glorification
specifically
the combination
of the ability
wisdom or holiness.
Ili
102
Noah(10: 17), control wise demo is glorified 10: 5). by relating And in his ability Apocryphon the healing to the of
-credited
and holy
stories.
who is
most often
represented
in
miracles tradition
as combining the attributes of wisdom and (256) . ....... is Solomon. Thb locus classicus of the that associated the wise Solomon with miracle
working later
- especially
exorcism,
the
Test.
in LAB 60 wise
(see p. 50 above) 11% and in the Qumran"community(257)'the Solomon was dir ectly
bility to control
linked
demons.
with
This technique
shift
in
healer not
mythical century
or literary AD it is
A little thistoricall
individuals exorcist,
the Rabbis5 .
The methods
of these
individual
healers
in literature
ii
103
seems to vary from the simple prayer '. **Get outIt on of
and history
used by some Rabbisl hand prayers finally actual healers in the Genesis and incantations the success, terms is (Jesus),
to simple Apocryphon,
and laying
reflected
19: 13).
III
3.1 In material
this
chapter
we want
to examine
relating This
to exorcism is
in preparation (in
where we will
material to ascertain
attempting
early
Church handled
material.
")
A preliminary for
matter
which
any gospel research (2) Problem. In this study components in the first of the solution place we accept
we will
assuming viable
Markan priority, there seems (4) in explaining alternative found to be common to Matthew
than
to suppose that there is a (5) has been The Q. Q of nature is probably best to see it as
111
105
of tradition
C. K. Barrett
a stratum
for, as
rather
says it which,
than a single
is
document
since it
however (? )
be proved".
The material
be the limit
of the Q tradition
to them. In fact
treatme'nt
in Matthew
we do not have all, of (9) Indeed, later we shall and Luke. to our theme the material common 00)
to Matthewand
Luke not
We do not assume that there is a literary relationship (11) between Q and Mark, literary relationship or a direct (12) between Matthew and Luke.
If
we accept
history
of the last
stage(s)
of redaction
to be taken
as being of Sir
1o6
Turner rely for
(15)
utilized.
But these
studies
on simple
the possibility
Gaston's
a considerable to Matthew,
advance
on Hawkins,
regard
of
study
vocabulary, be extremely
to a particular cautious
and avoid
on mere frequency
of occurence.
now proceed to examine the principal that have to do with Jesus and exorcism, those which occur in Mark (1: 21-8 par.; 9: 14-29 pars. ) and then 22-7). Then we shall
5: 1-20 pars.;
7: 24-30 par.;
(Mtt. 12: 22-30/Lk. 11: 14-23 and Ak-3: examine the Temptation narratives
Mk. 1: 12f. ) because of the suggested connection story Baptist and the defeat (Mtt. 11: 2-6/Ik. exorcisms'and we will-look 1-1/M. of Satan
Jesus'
self-understand(Mk. 6: may
Mission(s)
7-12.30/Mtt-10: be important
20) because it
in assessing Jesus'
understanding
of his exorcisms.
111
107
;n
discussing
each pericope
we will
begin
sources
how seeing
tradition any,
of the stories
and sayings
of those
at work.
MWLI. tl-tg 21 U
LUL4,31-37
daek Ka*apvaodo 8'Kcdwrlvifs Kci+cpvco4 7ropcL%ovm w dw" W6W* r"em . Toft o#paow daL%Nwok gcdAv&" okob, Wkam iv h odmm.
liv m Tamaxd aoTooW Ti Mad a*mk 5" a6fok is RL"* iv 409* liv 6 mm cbms ytp &Moxwv av IXWVW 06Xswol
"Kal wvcdpcm
Obal i "P"" ! r-v IV 33Kcd I fuwVA IV dv4wnvq i iv Tj avvaywya conw dwxpatcv 4wvq p saqwv-io amlom Kai 311dyWV. &Algpat wvgopa agaft; "V Kai jqa*6 N*pnW; " 4vivla. ook sal Tf 'InooD N4a y* TI AlCri Kai co4 ftaacu 4ft ;' ofid a64 36%CdJWCT*ay
"W RIVA4 ,
IS&
Apih ; ON at Tk A6" TOO OM holL Uywv- +q* hoD. 36mi txcTipnm uOTO 6 'Iqooos dwolimn bl" obf6v
IRCAft It a6to .. n KW mmpdj %CA " +-Am W &AkpTov T6 rit0pa JX&cv It OTA ouwv WXJ 31YA WP6%IGUTM lk*Dqaw Tt;; -M.
&W Gft& T6 Kd Rdh ; Znv ItRAM" acap6vwvCk T6 pcyd4 ftavm Gan PA#" a&r6V 36 MWIyJWM T-,
if iom
Kcd Tols wvv)pm ToFq an IV ROO* Kai kwfta KGIVJ ltal'4000laV t=daa% 61COMPTOIS aO* WKW it- swopamv. FAAONW600M Axot W* UbTd JOV 4 &Nkh GOTOO90" we* cwo -UYMXOG di U"Tftv imprAgpoo. rcwxtdcm. T41 * x, pov
3.2.1
not found
It
is immediately
Apart
apparent
from
that
this
story
is
that Matthew any hesitancy (18) is said to have had about exorcism, or his tendency to (19) the main reason why Matthew abbreviate miracle stories, left out this story was probably because it did not suit his
in Matthew.
III
log
purpose
it.
of Jesus'
directly
in the Sermon on the Mount (5: 1-7: 27). that part stories there of his there was no need to transfer Gospel in his for there were
Matthew may have felt this other story quite to a later suitable
sources.
hand,
taking
of Jesus' though
exorcism
the of each -
healing
pericopes
teaching
ministry.
theme of the
combination
(a)
In the detailed
III
110
Some of the changes have to do with But Luke has made other more specific phrase explanation. changes to In 4: 33 (20)
Luke consistently
uses F-'v in
the Holy
(1: 17; 2: 27; 3: 16; 4: 1,1+ spirit. in that Mark, he uses spirits F ZXIJ uses
)a or
on ev
hand,
interchangeably
to evil he never
(exrev 'W
spirit
though
always,
possessq
spirit
in One's
control.
astonishing this
to the fact
in his but one divine shared receive own spirit not (23) In particular Spirit. the Pauline literature stresses (24) (Eph. 4: 4)e Spirit, that there is'one 1 Cor. 12: 13.; see But Luke also all, . (cf. Acts believes 2: 4,17,38; in using that the one Spirit 10: 44f.; EIv was shared by (25) Thus lg: lff. ). to the Holy spirits
of evil
of the Holy
of evil
spirit
an individual in which
the Holy
was something
one shared.
in between Mark's
"C47L
of
Ta so that
III
ill
demon'.
addition?
For carry
an 'unclean
not necessarily
I.
reated
uncleanness. spirit',
the Semitic
and when he takes it up from his (27) it, tradition he always either or if he uses it, alters (28) it somewhere in the pericope, or also cites modifies (29) in So SchUrmann is probably correct words of Jesus. (30) saying that here Luke is accomodating his Greek readers. term. 1unclean
Still
in v-33,
Luke alters
this
Xp-'&3v to
Luke
most likely
brings
forward
demon cries
out after
Jesus-has
required
contradiction
silence
of the
of
an apparent
and lack
of demoniacs'
a typical
description
(b)
In v-34
is
Ec to continue
He could
words and have the demoniac yell (33) Luke could intend Or (ii) gol" or "Leave alonel"(34) We
cannot it is is
meaning
a hapax legomenon.
Nevertheless
for the form unlikely EIV. is not common and is rare in (35) On the other-hand is more the latter i4Lo prose. (36) (37) the words of the And if, see, commonS_ as we shall
III
112
are to be taken then well. as disarming 'Leave defences (us) against fits the
demoniacs
the meaning
alone'
(c) In Lk. 4: 35 (/Mk, 1: 25f. ) there are the two minor alterations
be made of
is There little .
0 and LK was
to
ofATra
Greek and the process of absorption (38) had begun in the NT and Luke had a for-Ic; (39) Luke's alteration mean
as Deissmann noticed,
kg. r .Ae: 41T E , -roc-
that
4: 35 is parallelcain
PGMIV: 3013
(Mk. 1: 26)
(Sir").
(40)
Also in v-35
Luke has is
tV&v 1P
instead a literary is
undertaking
than
of Luke's
following
trying
command. Luke does usec-wbV*mcnrcj in 9: 39 (Mk. 9: 26) but On Luke's treatment this
of iuzq'Ajx -r; R4"covsee the man "into r a subject the to the ound
That he says the demon threw is most likely activity, Lukelproviding in line
perhaps
with
the
idea
(44)
111
113
Along with this it is noticeable that Luke (46) Mk. 9: 26 where the demon is said to cry out, convulse and leave him like a corpse. violent. Luke is clearly makf
the boy,
the exorcism
stories'less
oflearV`Q,; ,I
of his
o-cv
is
istic dispute
periphrasis.
an example contain
characterof is* no
or dissension(49) - all'agree
significantly
In Mark the amazement is authority is and teaching. directed more the the
more genera22y
at Jesus$ (cf.
v-32)
command. That
Luke wants
why he specifies ,,
U is . And we ,, command in 8: 29
Luke also
Jesus'
to it;
and
commandis'dropped
highlighting its
leaving
effectiveness.
(v. 37/Mk. 1: 28), perhaps for verse (52) Luke exchanges efq, X, m-t Lf or z`icnVi v-"a (& (53)being (54)_a much stronger word than 'report
used also of the roar of the sea (1k. 22: 29) and the rush of
III
114
wind report (Acts about 2: 2)-may Jesus have better characterized the
a mighty excited
that
went abroad.
(f) Luke's
We can now summarize what we have said treatment of this as part exorcism of his story. In
the wider
section teaching
exorcism)
the demon's
obedience
a report
went out.
- and,
what mig4t
of the story
in Mark's
traditionl
after
him, very
an
The Holy
motif, is
highlighted
in the
(1: 8,12)
slightly is set
removed from
of the Kingdom of God and in the pericope (1: 27) ties amazement This pericope this story
to Jesus' There
themes. Markan many embraces (1: 21,28; 14: *28; 15-:41; cf. 1: 9,14,16,39; (56) Jesus
are the themes of Galilee 3: 7; 6: 21; 7: 31; teacher (1: 21f., 9: 30; 27; cf.
16: 7);
the
6: 2;
14: 49),
(57)
1: 32-34,39; Christology
3: 11f.;
(60)
5: 7; (8: 30,38;
the authority
Jesus possesses charis(63) (1: 22,27; matic power cf-2: 10; 3: 15; 6: 7; 11: 28-33), (64) Thus we can and his ministry produces a universal echo.
probably say that (65) Mark. this miracle is indeed programmatic for
to this That
story is
of seems
1: 21f.
introduction
to 1: 23 belonged
together
forbidden and the repairing of nets were strictly (68) Thus regardless on the Sabbath. of the extent of Mark's (69) hand within they probably have not always vv. 21 and 22 belonged placed agreed to this vv. 21f., exorcism in their story. present That it is Mark who has is generally ing is not
position
v. 23. This
(2: 6 4: 43) 35-5: 1-3: passages and generally (70) be pre-Markan complexes. _ _
recognized
to
111
116
What is Mark's purpose in giving that this Jesus (71) introduction taught "with to
Why mention
as the scribes"?
story, teaching,
itself
contains intro-
and the
this
associated
was the scribes who were venerated (74) Yet Jesus had an of sacred Imowledge.
these unlike scribes. the scribes But in what way could to which Mark twice that doctrineo(75) Jesus
(73)
and it
unlike
(1: 22 and 27)? D. Daube suggested . licence pointed to give out, over fifty times translate authoritative
meant a Rabbits
in the Septuagint,
in not a single
does it
scribes his
or derived,
own, -based
on his
own. And if
the scribes
- especially
in that
of eicorcising
Jesus
by Beelzebul
(3: 22),
of blaspheming
Spirit
13),
Jesus appears as one acting of under the auhority scribes (78) We can conclude here'that Mark gave this exorcism God. story the introduction, that he did relationship it to bring between into Jesus' focus
In deciding story
how Mark has used the body of this We can, on the one hand, hand we can discuss in the story. task and direct
to the former
to be areas where
thing
that
is
said
about
the crowdts
response 27);
they were
'afraid'.
10: 24,32)
is'rgsponsible concept
seem that
Mark
here?
Jesus?
teaching impact
III
118
(82)
:,A or amazed.
to be a stereo-typed closing motif (84) taken over from Greek stories, probably tradition shows no consist-
motif,
43a; Mk.7: 37) and Luke (9 , -. *23/Mtt9*17:18) only once cf. Mk.9.
each add the motif to their (85) traditions.
it is present
to the Sammelberichte,
stories
7: 30 and, 9: 28 perhaps where we (and Luke (9: 43a)) would most expect it. interested general So, Mark does not seem particularly motif to the miracle in particular. probable stories (86) that in So
in adding this
to conclude this
seems quite
the
of Mark's tradition
in vv..,5,,., -. from
(87)
seems clear
the vocabulary
Tj vj(81)&g..X II .1
with Mark wants
X, Xot , Ira(
(91)
(90)
an infinitive.
retelling
That
miracle
- an exorcism,
111
119
the preaching-teaching (93) as proclamation. at least with at this point, of Jesus, but itself we must Jesusthe
Consequently with
associating after
Jesus-the-Teacher, Rabbis,
possibly
of the great
perhaps tradition. is
is making clear
Christology
despite
by the
3.2.4 We must now examine the core of the story 23-27a) to see how it Jesus. (a) The first is to be related element of the
(vv.
..... .... .. Some have doubted the in the demoniac the svnagogue. of
authenticity an funcleant of this, spirit expressing should find surprise his that a man with (95) a'synagogue. could
way into
characteristics
of demon-possession
at times (96)
symptoms
to have an origin of
an indication
of the Semitic
(c)
The
man
is
said.
'K'v..
4P
AvwiVo9tv is not a
apart from its use crowd
k-tXi'tr
to call -?
out? -for
of an aroused
terrified It
III
120
consternation. Does this of those reported consternation the historical go
extreme
who witnessed
The word has a religious in the Greek significance (99) but only in relation to the demonic, and the world, Greeks it felt and Roman generally (100) and so we canAnfer of the gods, the word itself concerned, in Mark save that, with barbaric nothing as far and unworthy in the use of
we are dealing is
used especially
zalling In
contrast, it
save, detect
might
no religious is -
use here.
the question
when a demoniac met Jesus disturbed of this and-cried study that out? in the
the demoniac became extremely We have seen in the first presence of other exorcists and cried part
to be disturbed that
of the era demoniacs were said (102) .e Thus it is possibl out. have been seen to have had who were confronted
............. of reasons for
as an exorcist affect
At the
a-similar
by him.
sufferers
same time
th'inkinR
.................
that this
not need to
introduce
of, Jesus. *
(i)
(103)
obliterate
of the demoniacs
III
121
17: 17f. he removes Mk. 9: 20, the most grotesque instance. Thus I 0 in but in Mk. 5: 7 the demoniacm, p (N /, CY. p4s,. (3 , '17 (104)so that Matthew (8: 29) this is toned down to
the consternation no consistent is only barely element evident. in his (ii) stories. Mark shows Thus in
use of this
of this
consternation;
of expression
shows, for
example, no desire
on
of Mark to portray
the demons or demoniacs worshipping 8: 28; 9: 42) pays no particular We could add a third
interest that in this the lack part-of
(iii)
of
indicator
the
of the early
Church's
- viz.
they but
enterprise, to this
factoro
here,
as of the
represent unlikely
Church - it
introduced of the
stories
and that
evoked a disturbance
111 (d) In 1: 24 (/Lk. 4: 34) the distress I'What have to do you with to (105) TTTt .
is vocalized
corresponds
The actual
of a demon was well However any decision demon's words extent that on the
the demons
Jesust into
brought
the demoniacs'
scheme of
the 'messianic
of Jesus. that
secret'
We shall understand
deleting
see,
history
to 3: 11,
(106)
especially
Mark did
and use the demons' words as Nevertheless, 1: 26 and 5: 7f. as 'messianic Jn a moment, we the demons' words confessions', maintains and that in
framed
of Mark's
tradition.
Fridrichsen
exclamations
of the demons "we have to see a-confession to the demon and intended of being theory in alliance can easily with to defend Beelze-
attributed Jesus
(my emphasis)
bul. "(107)
be dismantled.
Firstly
component* content.
he says OM
History
that
control
used in
the name of
'Jesus?
to be an intrusion
into
the content,
III
123
appear in 5: 7 but, messianic as we will see, it is not a name of that
also
particular
or christological deliberately
significance
to'-be
says that
the demon's
because it
reply but
serves an apologetic
to'this. three they concise were . clauses,
end.
(110)
a sufficient
on the opening
of the utterance is
weapon.
that
nowhere
a connection
the demonic
confessions
How then
should
we interpret
the words
of the demons?
We shall
and
are the
they
(i)
The words
'q)o not
with
the intended purpose of stopping the person interfering (115) (note Jn. 2: 4). The hints here that this phrase can
_ _
are confirmed
III
124
use of a para3-lel
t o avywrios
by Philo's
,
construction
FLoo -rc)&
suffering. clearly
"Every of evil
on the way to be widowed and empty 10 man of God, thou hasE (117) of my iniquity and my sin"'.
come in to remind-me
Philo
the notion
of 'warding
off'
of Velcomet of the man of God as Bauernfeind thinks, (119) Philo is talking about for, as Burkill points out,
how a God inspired
to one (118)
man, on the rememb'rance of past iniquities ka kete IN-ons& IF to keep them in check andurom returning and sins, attempts (120) to his old ways.
the historicity,
of this
part us
of
to no theological is certainly
a Semitic
to literary
conventions.
111 does not explains its that conform to 1 Kings 17: 18 the passage which best
125
the meaning and purpose seems quite decision of v. 24. will likely,
of the whole
(ii) above,
and in
of religion
opening
defensive
we need to ask - is Mark or the early added-this title, either, or for to be ' to conform dogmatic original
purposes?,
to the earliest
From what we have just characters so we will determine involved direct in this
said story
'Nazareth'
the meaning It
of this
component
of the significance
is not
a, term that
Church
as a designation
Christian
And for
Matthew
coming from
(123) . (3) When they were used, Nazareth in Gali .1 ee. and, Ax
Church
to the Palestinian
that did not use
from a'commiinity
III
126
would have no special title of Jesus. interest in promoti
the title
point reasons
we can conclude
that
there
are no
to introduce
If
of PGM VIII:
13 ("I Is
know you Hermes, who you are and whence you come and which your city")). we see that the origin, If of the one being Mark or the early in order in this have chosen*'Jesus 'Son of Godt is not out to conform
named
was of interest
(see p. 30 above).
they
than
as Mark. seems to have done in 3: 11. Thus, of place for the demon to address appear
Jesus as. 1from, NazarethIj reasons particular why the early appellation, term/title te2.1ing
and as there
to be no dogmatic this
to introduce so far
This
phrase
clearly The
dogmatic
purposes.
Mos-10: 1,3),
Church
171 theme (1k. 10: 18 and Rev. 20: 10; cf. pp. SSIfbelow) and Jesus
127
is portrayed
relation
ministry
Jesus.
A( a'1II6XAv:,
interest
to Mark). in
(see chap.
of religions we find,
as we did-when
the mention
entity
of him - including qualification designatory p. 517 above). In Mk. 1: 24 after of this is rain "I
activities.
descripti7e is
reverse identified,
that
know ...
described.
A good parallel
(who is being God where bringer, (127) this invisible,... So once again description
described
reasonable activity
of Jesus' storye
of the original
(iv) defence,
power
So far,
apart
from
the
initial
in a continuing
Jesus' origin
to overand his
Jesus,
III
128
(the demon's destruction). Now the climax knowledge of the of Jesust
comes with
the "I
know) your
fo=s,,,, designed
occur
spiritual formula
out of place
historical
veracity
That
is we have here
the prolepsis
of the subject
of a subordinate that it
what should
we make of the
of
by-noting
relation (in it of no
rarely,
4: 27,30;
(3: 3); is
Rev-3: 7) but
interpreting recognizable
The basic
intention from
of the word is
which
is marked off
the secular, that is it denotes the (131 ) Thus the term is used of beings sphere of the divine. (132) that belong to this sphere. it is used And importantly (133) In Jer. 1: 5 the prophet is 'sanctified' of individuals. that is, he belongs to God. In Sir. 45: 6 Aaron (and Moses? )
III
129
'holy'. And in Ps-105: 16(LXX) Aaron is referred
are called
status
as a genuine If this
identifying
Jesus as belonging
perhaps
in the service
of God as an exorcist.
into
of
be apparent cited
are actually
words
of demons. In particular parallels are - like in order this that role as it to the 'I
no precise All
extra-biblical parallels
know$ formula..
the precise
13 - words addressed to a power-authority - .d.. its ai Bultmann(135) to called attention to Bauernfeind's evidence work. Bultmann said in the
'Protective*
takes quite
Rather,
to be using
technical
up the aid
control
being
in one case
aid,
in another
(e)
the technique
Jesus used
III
130
the demon. In the first part of the verse out, Jesus (136)
to exorcise is said
that '1-1 I
material
Volent
as Kee shows,
the commanding word spoken by God or his (138) upon which evil powers are subjugated That in Mk. 1: 25 g`, ir(rZv takes on the
a demon is suggested not only by (139) the Markan context but also by the of this story, I immediate context of the word. And the demon has, according of subjugating to our investigations, been making an attempt to disarm Jesus.,
But also
from what we have seen Wtr!, vC^Wv may highlight potential this of the story. So we should activity ask, at
interpretation Although
of Jesus' at first
entered
material?
sight 04o)
accepted
active.
(143)
Thus
it motif
active
here,
seems as if in this
theological
confrontation
between Jesus
(f)
words
of Jesus
is
is -
it
Probable
Jesus'
words,
or didAhey
originate
III
131
(i) In relation '3917L to OP4. that this injunction we need to take into to silence may have
constructed
Mark,
by the early
at least, might
seems that
prohibition
as a general. injunction
Church wished to talk that
.,
about it did
command it
47f. in 10: as
to
rather
than #cb6G?
7vwhich
so strongly than
Uncantational is,
restriction?
rather someone
That
whereas where they are unable to operate,, (148) in Mark the other other injunctions are requests and in a'Position
commands to silence. understood
A7 at Ir "4.4
(147)
Further,
if
the meaning
is
'be silent
.7
words
a glaring
oversight
In other
in
1: 25 does not
fit
the pattern
in the rest of Mark, nor of a conscious (151) understood at this point, and was probably bound or restricted.
of being
On the
other
0 0uwe-j-rt hand
is
well
known
in
the
magical, prevent
papyri.
For example P. Osio. 1: 161f. of a person: -muzzle speak against (152) me... 1 Vrv and
"Remedy to
the wrath
f ound at CYP'rus
equivalent
to
XOtTQISCF&'
(to -bind)
or kw"Wrr;AA*s magical
III
132
used in incantations. was to (155) Ibindt Thus in is (153) (154) sometimes the context And the original in relation meaning to
knot)
quite
appropriate
corresponds part
of the primary
(ii)
Deissmann pointed
PGM IV:
3013f f-rjor-rj()t
With this
"_-ro&
lfCV)E
are found
w1l
in Philostratus'
the demon
to quit
...i9i. )hi P 11 where a spell
(156)
and in Lucian's
poison,
and in And in
drives
out
ifsX-ru17b, ) (158)
Vic
a- demon. order
(157)
In view
no obvious
reasons
why this is
tradition.
(g) first
Mk. 1: 26ff.
relates
demon is We should
or convulse
111
133
(Mk. 4: (cf. the demon? Ik. 1: 26; 35; 9: 26; Mk. exit of and see (159) mk. 4: 13)). There are a number of parallels to this (160) in other literature. violence
Mark,
or his
tradition,
seems to be-fairly
consistent
in portraying
included did from not then
this
if
stories.
5: 13 is
That Mark is clear of
to the stories
of Jesus
the fact
he shows no particular
consistency
interest
in its
function.
Thus in 9: 26f.
Jesus$
the violence
but
coidd
this may
towards
portraying
compassion
be said
Jesus'
However it
is
that
any sector
stories.
omits
the whole
(they ! Trv4'Sov7, c,
suffocated/strangled)
(they
convulsions
is also telling
aspect of Jesuslexorcisms.
of "having
Most
and 'loud
111
134
In so far as the first of the early the early tradition three Church Evangelists on this point this that represent it seems uninto
Church
introduced it
violence in all
the Jesus it
probability
of the event.
The crowd's
response
is
said
discussed part
this
of Mark's
that
tradition motif,
of the event.
Finally the story reports elements (1) (2) (3) (4) the
we can ask,
From-our
discussions -
amazement. in vv. 27bf. ) Mark has heightened Jesus' teaching and healing a
(particularly between
connection
tradition,
made, at least
in Mark's
III
135
3.3 The'Gadarene'Demoniac(161)
Mofth. 8,28-34
MWL Sol-to
I K41 4%hv ds T6 wdpav ift hUm" off Av X"av T6V ripaornw.
Laig.
S. 16-n
N Kai ardwlcum
ds To xip" Tft w rspwra' lodw Amwipa rawaias. m G&T* hd lxwv ok am&
k4"vtaav Gk#
Wo gamovirAlteva Ix Tav pvnpdwvIt. lpx*VO4.
4V4um
'k
iv wvhnnauhfl%
w6lon
xW xp6vv I"
lvddam
Xam" UUN
40" ph
kX64W Tr4*
66oflad"m
'
mwivoldqoklpmdwivTcis i4w wroiwpw dxtv Iv Tofs pv4pom Rd 06M d"m 06ogdn OOUN pv4paciv. 136M6 Gkow64" 4M T6GOT6V WC4. mw wd" w au;gmv aguabo K4d &Wwdaft WOM6 Ph Wom sid Ift ct v. w" cow... i0m, Rd o6kk. ToXu4v 66fav gaodmI ax0i && wawlk "aft
Kd Apipcm IV Toil pv4pam KW iv Toil aptort 0 Igpdrov Kid umx6wnw daur6v 4 Zaiwov T6vlqoof3v &6pax* )J#01S. 0"
lbpaptv KW w"m alho 'Rd "djas +wvj pgy* U"* Tf fRol 'wed +onj pcydAq ctwcv-if lpol 1nooe ? At "a NOD TOO 6- aW sok 'InooO A 6OcoO olai ToG roG . *lam-, 69WU a T6v My. 114 Uopol ace. p4 its PaocManS. in W! I ugm V&P GOO , tm wap4yyox" yip To wvtdpcm . R"
T6 Wvtopa T6
dxd*am
lromoit Y4 XP6"n M"Ww"a 66TO Sw - luoptocTo didNov iced WOOMOAGG046v" gw&lap-. V.4.5 CE 'mo Ta UOP&kkaLwm OW6 P406wv WPM- NbnwilnCk T61 *galhmowu 66qwviou if 5V"A m; GOT6v, m6ia6T6v 6'lnaoos TImr5"pd 5" ky"iv, Kai IIX! aoTo - kywav avopd pa , BTI lonv ;6 61dwa* lexal da*. W6wp6veaimMAtkaOr6v-." rAd WOU01 idpgv. Tva P4 am aOT6v Wow Wapgx&A vapewam GOT6V TvaP4 twTol 11064 300 &J ammoTak IRM T4,; Xtipa. d=agrv . 32AVU Omit df ThvdOu
la, Wpk T# apa ayom xoipw Pcy* .PGKP&VdW*GLNT&dytknXOIPWV WOXUW 12xal wapendlem POOKopim6G4, ponopiM. 310161 OM lrapgKdAM Adyovms-**ov4pdsdsio(n IKWeiS 4pft d dw& obf6v Airmsa&6v Tva ds abToin &04"cv. Ayd)m xolpous, Apft 16V X01pov. a's TO OTOlov '3Kd twdrpg*cv a6rors ditAhm 32Kai dM aLNTOFS KW ol M Ad. timpt" 7* drAhpTu allOhm T& r4c4ara hvm Gpprtm X01pov% III zcd 1606 GpprlVAV Tok dS Min XOIPOVIj Wd- Kai 4 &yAn KaM ToO icprnivoO ds ds 4 dyiAn iv ou KaTi ToGxMp"G
In Toa
AgAhFv
&ytlul Xoipwv trawfiv PompdvndvToapa Kcd WUPCKdxtm lRd Tva ilmpi*q a6mis
akbv,
Tkv
ck lRdvoustiockhfv I iwdfpc*w a6mis. 33ilcAhvfa M 6movia &6 lroG dv4inmu dcj)4ov Gome" ds Tobi X0409%.KW 4 dydAn KaT& TOO iqmmo (k Tv
III
136
(Mork. S.1.101
(Luk.S.26-ni
am
I+Wfov, Ck Kai6WL%hvfft
Iv W"v dwtyyo wdwa KW 76TOW
34KGI 1600 IACfq j W6AK 60100VICOVdVWV. T4 In"o, dS 0
ITAX04V
1&6vM occd
IPAA&" supd
OWINAVOOM676V l(rxqK6MT6vxcyvk4%
m4pavoi)m
Tobs w66as
W 4+OMDIIM.
lexal bqyjoavTo
C16TON al 166YM W61 tydvm 06T6V WOPCKd)AM ft6 uW 6piev a6TtW. pove;opdvv Kd =0 NJUvro Irapasoldv a6f6v
'jILV05 116 14op4oneav. 6"yyakov Ral U aOoit ol 156vM min doOn 6 6as. abT6v ftav T6 3? Kai Apilnetv
Irm&os *
5susPCMOI
. to ge Weivom Oma 41176 wxoiov (IMSUIPP&S CISTWOV Owdaypc*cv 30 Win U abToG 6 "p dfoil 1104WUPCMQ 0616v 6 608P0vwhw Tve PWCIIAO j. 10 iccd Wo T&liatovea elvat oby a&#* 6139 0K deav ahv, WA Itya cl&re - ew. Lum U 6616Y 14mv. 0" CK ev 011C6V cou WO$ tobs bi wrpg+tds Tbvoix6v gov
Kai dwdyyoxov abmit 6 RfN61 Kai &nyoa am wn Iwoln"y 6 hj wmiqm Kai 414adv ut 10ad dw. Kai men am AP%CTO iv A Acco. AwWtv Kof akiv m WOW mummov mtpo a ininm W641
zmt. ihpa>. ago ll*M GbTo 6 'Incolls.
ft i*V owvoblv..
This exorcism
story stories
is
both
the most
'astounding'
tionsgeschichtlich # provoked
These difficulties
have of
a wide spectrum
of opinions
on the historicity
this
story
as well
as a variety
of interpretations
for the various
oF the
stages
meaning
and intention
of the story
Some see the story as faithfully (162) reflecting while others see it as a historical event (163) a Popular folk tale appended to the Jesus tradition.
And some interpret the story (164) psychologically while
in its
transmission.
III
137
interpret it in the context of first century demonology. (165)
others And it
has been seen as a Christian midrash in:: spired by (166) This variety to us is. 65: 1-5of approaches signals not only that we may not yet but also fully that understand we should the hature proceed with of
tradition,
(167)
3-3-1 Matthew 8: 28-34. It does not appear from the (168) that Matthew wishes to draw structure of this Gospel 069) the to this miracle story, particular attention story simply appears in a section given over primarily to
miracles
chapters together teaching
in
' ._
the Gospel
the kingdom,
and healing
every
and every
infirmity".
ends to which
of his. tradition
to bring
alteration.
(ppuObelow) see
what he considered
to be healings
significance.
III
138
there were two blind people involved. to which Matthew
he mentions this theological for
in what turns
considerable
out to be a pericope
significance, Apart fram
messianic
to have a prediIction
two are being explicit where the text already implies that (171) 'but he involved, seems to have an inclination
also
describes
the
says that
probably
precise
than
Semitic
idiom
jv iTvLjuxrt
dependence,
to any literary
indicate.
Matthew
by saying way",
that
pass that
grotesque of chains,
involved
flageMation.
It
himself 5: 6), to mtt. for
seems rather
ofthe in
surprising
of places
that
taking
Matthew
does not
avail
(cf. Mk.
he has
so as 22;
include
the
(Mtt.
8: 2/Mk. 1: 40; 2;
9: 18/Mk-5:
15: 25/Mk.?:
Mtt.
Yet here (8: 29) and in 27: 29 '(/Mk. 15: 19) Matthew deletes Rark's use of it. In " 15: 19 the attitude to Jesus is one
III
139
it is uses TF)Do1r#cL---vEZv classified of true
Matthew
8: 29 as an of
what he believed
to be the truth
same verse
is
but
in view with
particularly
association
(Lk-17: 15-16; 19: 37-38; Rev-5: 11-12; 7: 9-10) and the God of
voice
mtt-3:
of God and the risen Jesus (Rev, 1: 10; 4: 1; 10: 8; 11: 12; (176)
13-17; 17: 1-8)here. Matthew probably thought it The address ( itv of the demons to Jesus not 44oj ), and the -vQ 'roCr IBLOO 40 is
inappropriate altered
to the plural
and highlight
Mark's
When discussing
the Babylonian
materiall
(177)
an opponent.
when Matthew
a question,
he is not merely
Isoftening'
the words
(178)
but
of the demons
L dw-O'cKv 5w
(179)
Yet in retaining
Matthew preserves
the conflict
between Jesus
Matthew's
alteration
14o
material proposition. to torment (a) from his tradition to inserting a whole new
Matthew's us before
demoniacs
PY,Aolt of r',
early
Christological
Church use it
kingdom Mtt-11:
3; Lk. 7: 19f.;
Heb-10: 37; and Mtt. 21: 9; 23: 39; there are also person sayings in
of his
17; 9: 13,3.9;
n-10: 10;
18: 37)(b)
Matthew,
using -a
&Cc
to the
pagan country.
may suggest
mission
perhaps its
in
mission
see later,
part
In the final
at his
'Mepart
angels".
the eternal fire and prepared for the devil (184) So, regardless of whether or not the as a question in 8: 29 that or a the
111 eschatological Yet from ogical torture of the demons has. already we see that begun.
141
the eschatol-
toment
abbreviation
is
severe
of between remains
the whole
technique.
to enter
command -. "Gol"
(186)
and for
say -
significance
describe
an enemy of God.
Matthew
thought
the demons
4-fibbowov
drowned
iv
(189)
demons were
Up in
t6,
this
point -
to
the singular
Matthew by the
drowned.
Thus abiding
Pigs
to be drowned but,
swam back
to mention
traumatic. and it
in it.
would be surprising
Uv) after Nowhere else
to find
Gospels to
demons,
an exorcisml is in
be their way to
extra-biblical
spirits.
to another,
from (193)
simply
to just
flee
'diet.
(194)
aspect of v. 29
as the destruction
And if
of the demons was in Matthew's him to make it seems to me that more obvious 'in fact And so,
Matthew
Matthew final
importantly, the
of Jesus with
destruction
follows
his
source
in telling
us that
the herdsthe
primarily
'proclaiming'
ITT
143
t-eporting! and perhaps ) good news about Jesus (11: 4; take 12: 18; 28: it that
simply 8,10
Matthew intends
when Matthew 'says that interesting the NT, here to note that
went
ovS is
times
the
maidens
'Sosanna ... 11). Thus Matthew has the crowd meet not who possesses v. 29). This frightening interpretation of the remainder the towns-people right mention mind and of the powersl is of v. 34. see
seatedq However,
clothed, Matthew
demoniac(s) Jesus. (a
meetj
Jesus
is
a request
region.
Matthew motif
eliminates in this
story. him,
in this
3.3.2 8: 1f.
in Luke is bound by
ITT
144
mentioned their first the call of the Twelve in-Luke. in 6: 12-16,8: The Twelve 1ff.
Having this is
appearance - notably
(and
disciples spirits
of evil
and infirmities)
the good news of the kingdom teach (198) authority (8: 16-21) (8: 4-18), heal ))l (8: 38ff.;
witnessed
on discipleship
cf.
the disciples
same areas
- over
and to preach
the kingdom
of God.
for
this
story
by a desire to improve the gramma and style to be motivated (199) One major structural is Luke's alteration of Mark. tra33 posetion of the description where it of the demoniacb Jesus' plight
highlights
to the demoLac. is
no longer
mechanical
in compassion.
there
merit
alteration, But in
to Jesus. rather
S.E*5, u(*c
than Mark's
Matthew
omitted
III
145
but Luke also entirely alters the sense of the to 'bind' In Mark, L the demon the
altogether,
Try-jyl>)f4
has Jesus ,
(200) command
, 'r -rs Pq,"otrs - voicing the commonopinion that , (201) It is clear places were the homes of demons.
Luke thought Jesus was confronting than and
conversing
request he-goes
Xrp4v it
for
on, altering
that
was because
(Mk-5: 11) but not to be sent the region' (202) The $abyss' was the bottomless'pit that in the final judgement 11ff.; Satan
angels
be thrown 36-39);
(cf-5: Ci
anything is
in
this
Thus again,
Matthew that
the herd
of pigs
drowns in
the lake
pigs.
(see P. 19,9below).
146 to the episode as Mark, but when the people went out to
see what had happened his feet Jesus' grateful Jesus for right they saw, not but of only that a clothed man in the at the
also
In view to his
10: 39 (where
teaching),
and falling
demoniac (204)
to have taken
up the position
of a grateful
interesting to describe
to this
pericope
the healings
of Jesus cr always
never
refers
room for
power of faith
('206)
Jesus
to
because Matthew
fear
Luke preserves
'missionary impact
the miracle
was God
whohad
147 contribution thought that Mark has made to this this pericope belongs pericope. to a longer It is generally
pre-Markan
ark 43) (4: 5-5: which, with few modifications, used unit (208) in his Gospel. Following this unit of material there. is _ in 6: 1-6 the rejection That Mark of Jesus ot Nazareth. juxtaposed evident of up, this is suggested by the Markan hand 5: 43 and 6: 1ff. (209) Mark probably intends in 6: 1-2a. the theme short'pericope four to reflect back (210) miracle on to, and sum JtxzZlezv
stories: (211) In 1: 21-28, a pericope closely connects the two units. (212) 6: Mark has already showed that closely 1-6 resembles interest in the relationship Thus the first between Jesus' teaching Mark has is to place - rejected
the last
the use of
his
and his
miracles.
it
Some of story
to the
itself
and form
where did
the pre-Markanj
or earlier
both do and -
belong
of the historical-Jesus?
(i)
It
has long
been proposeAthat
in 5: 1-20 two
previously
separate
stories
together.
(214)
148 D. L. Bartlett
this theory.
(215)
One story
4: features in 35-41; 23-27; 3: 1: 17-19; story with, common with and 9: 14-29. A second story involved the tale of the destruction of the pigs. Such a division on a number of presuppositions. (1) The proof of an exorcism fits
someone like feature which (2) Apollonius
seems to rest
or Josephus
points
to a story'of
a Jewish story.
exorcist
The exchange
suggests criteria
there (216)
subject
matter
and centre
of interest
are
by such a division
of the material.
(5) The start and end of the story are difficult to sort I.. out as 5: 1-20 stands, -but such a division as proposed above
reduces the difficulties.
Finally,
iculties the result among other
it
is supposed that
etc.
diffto say,
a particular
We should
now examine
these
presuppositions*
(1)
As we
III
149
completed our examination for of Jesus as an exorcist whether or of
not possible
stage
the episode
of the pigs
character we
stories
of Jesus. that
notwithstanding mention
of the pigs
of the success
of the exorcism.
As parallels
Philostratus. Peter severe in Life
to this
We have already
illuminating
the NT stories
o Peter
we can note
(ostendo( show
218))
by leaving
up a statue.
hand when we examine Mk-5 we find with the above parallels. enter Firstly
some points
in Mk-5: 13 the demons X(S cited. proof rather Secondly of his to leave to being parallel success. the
(stT-jAboy
makes no request
to the pigs - in, preference (219). 1 know of no single of the region. that-would cover all of these points.
sent exorcism
111
150
On the other hand the first mentioned aspect of the pigs displacement incident from above)
that
we have just
We saw (p. 14
demons transferred exorcists (220) On these. -parealels to some object. texts Thompson says. is that water the demons in. the vessel will be poured
of the magician
to-the
the spell,
broken
on the ground". -( it is
connection Hibbert it
also
quoting
from Count
D'Alviella's
lectures is
"Sometimes thus
deemed essential
expelled
pass into
a scrap
of wood,
away, ... 11(2,22) 0 and history of religion to view parallels show of than is, a
co=ents is
as part 'proof'
of the exorcist's
the demons pass from the man to the pigs from the pigs to their watery "the home).
Indeed, .
Dibelius that
admitsl(223) find
miracle
is proved
properly
shown later
whether
can be regarded
III
151
to the original tradition of the historical-Jesus.
belonging
(2) hypothesis
upon which
the exchange
the demon, and particularly thought zqore likely The first to be part
the use of the term Roman or Hellenistic of this than to note presupposition That in
origin
can be is,
with is
when we were examining in Mk. 1: 21-28 were adduced to out of place a Latin loan
Aq, &'-? v is
it
is
from the
Century
BC-(cf.
of its
(224)
Thus there
thinking
at home outside a strictly (226) Roman milieu - even in Palestine. So we conclude that _ the second presupposition is unsupported, The verbal exchange
Ax-(c6v the wor4 and are not foreign to a Palestinian milieu.
fit
is that 5: 1-20 does not presupposition (227) the form *of an exorcism of the and that a division
would bring Gospel one story into line with the form of to
(3) Another
material other
exorcisms. stories
determine
which
III
152
tradition
if any,
... particular
Few stories, up against r arbitxily alone is
is a highly
show a pure will stories always
questionable
Iformll reveal
methodology.
one story and
(228)
to set
differences,
im Leben on 'form'
It
and subject incident
is supposed that
matter is being But is
a different
centre
of interest
of the a story
of the pigs.
must have only conflict, heighten wordsq could interest the fate
point?
the pigs
incident
of the pigs
see what had happened and they and in his right mind.
is
presumed to reduce
and end of the pericope. of the pericope and the difficulties story. have
Finally
and inconsistencies
it
the textual
difficulties
by dividing
in solving
153
problem stories of giving story, depart of the end of the narrative. creates sufficient at least one major In fact difficulty creating that in the first Jesus stories to. of two
explanation
the crowd makes the radical from their region. From other fear
exorcism
Jesus we might
expect
either
request
(230)
of this
investigation
into doubt
as it
have to explain
explanations
the problems
the story.
(ii) time
Another
major
problem
that
from
to time
is jh'din'of*the*story.
says
that
the story
"evidence
could satisfactorily
is given in this
end at 5: 15 for
versel first
of the cure
(clothed
secondly,
point
to make is
that
while
v-15
it
that
does not,
and it
must be shown, to
But naturally
Jesus
follows
of him (v-15).
vv. 16 and17
III
154
is unlikely for there is little evidence
an addition
Wrede takes
verses
as being
of evidence, Burkill
are open (233) has enumerated them. home and tell what
1: 45a;
a place need
(cf-3:
Thirdly
over
at any stage
story's
history.
Jesus'
Fourthly
proclaiming
Messiahship is
to be
"what that Jesus
justified
Mark
did not compose these verses in line (236) ....... ;geheimnis. Further evidence between _ vv. 18f. -and the rest
with
that
of the story
is the reference
from
comes
for the
bound up
Though it
seems correct
to conclude
that
the connection
III
155
it (238) is still possible
between vv. 18f. and 1-17 was pre-Markan, that Mark has contributed
to make it It is is conform to his that
to the ending
objectives for
in such a way
(1) (5: 18)
noticeable the
a similar
the man's
request other
virtually
in
of the
in3: 14
phrase
the Twelve.
(239)
the
Wrede intended,
them. The usual widest sense of almas (240) Thus the healed man's ! parish' Iclan'. not conflicting extension with *Txos activities is certainly is
while This
of the mants,
probably
responsibility
79, K-m with
(241)
S243)
and particularly
"cirs(v and k7) between vv. 18-20 and the call the connection
here
of the. disciples.
and the preceeding Mark's interest reworking in using
made in his
to serve
discipleship.
(b) noting
We should
text
as a whole,
relates
to the historic.
III
156
(i) In vv. 2 and 6 Jesus twice meets the demoniac.
gives two possible is explanations for this. that His the trad-
solution
Schweizer's ihat
attractively
simple for
6 v. can reasonably
be accounted
unskil-ful
the digression resumption of the story after (244) And we note that Luke (8: 29) has attempted vv. 3-5. to tidy up this point of the story.
(ii)
in vocabulary (vv-3
clear
explanation,
though/Avivcv
But in any case nothing (246) the words. Even if that he introduced to suggest it
can be made of the distinction is into vv. 3-5, either a Markan word - in there seems to be no
evidence
that
composed
or significantly
contributed
to this
(iii)
Jesus. term,
V. 6 says that
and7r/omx
V'-"
rx
In view even if
activity,
Church
strata
of the-tradition.
behind
interpretation
III
157
is likely that 6 v. represents an aspect of the original
it
story.
We can probably
That
as it
is
not used
consistently of religion
the exorcism storiesl and as it. has history (249) is the phrase probably an echo parallelss
of an historical
event.
(iv) four
<C(( (rat
This
of
phrases
constitute
Mk. 1: 24 it
was established
to disarm
understand is not
phrase
dependent
on 1: 24 is suggested by the change (250) The form here in 5: 7 TV to uo, (01a on the apotropaic of it formula (252) suggests. in 1 Kings 17:
Philo's'use as -
but we should
phrase
appellation is is little
of Mark's
hand in occurs in
the only
the phrase
the vocative.
III
158
Mark has not added the reference is possible that to Jesus as the Mark
Even if
We will
part
address
to Jesus
is
"'The to
no exact defencel
in the
found
literature
appellation
traditions Christian
of NT tradition,
Church needed to introduce So again that this event. it seems that 'title'
we can be in
was included
of this
1. ' in is the third IOV rOV elemert crz (257) the demon's words of defence. We have seen the approp(3) riateness
it would
'w
6r4i'S'w of
in this
context
111
history later softens of the transmission reactions it as if to it. they bind entirely of this story is it clear from
159
to the thought
of an attempt
in keeping
3045f.
reads
I adjure
bringer.
11(258). 00 .
the demon to be
to fetter Jesus.
of power-authority
In dealing
the significance ing/1 that
eschatological
the early
we any confidence defence? demons, abyss), demon is not his I think (they this said fate.
of this said
in viewof
to happen to the or sent That but into isq that the the is up this
to set
situation.
(259)
8 v.
before
changed because
immediately
III
16o
simply om'itted? (2) V. 8 was not by an editor. stories
story
However, it
exorcism would
would be surprising
(3) V. 8 is
that
leave
command is thought
necessary clau e.
in a subordinate as
a whole details.
in the na ration shows delight (260) But v. 8 certainly reads seems that is its another present intends
three
is permits
in
p*it? -(&T45
clearly
in his
perhaps
to ward off
or overlapping that is
dialogue
of someone's
to having
power over
is how
v. 9 and this if
show in a moment, to
on the other
of the
-6
111
161
come out'
demon 'by God' and the command to the demon 'to overlap in some way (and cancel each other
) out? so that
successful
and important.
in his exorcism,
That
v. 9
thought
to be initially
cure
successful
of the blind interpretation proceed
man in Mk.
in this
presuppositions that
in saying
"Jesus it
so powerful its
in taking
v. 9 as being Jesus'
attempt
'yes'
the possession of someone's name meant power over that ( 263) And further, person. of the historicity of this notion in the context of a supernatural conflict of-any we can be confident. dogmatic this have they reasons
Church would want to introduce and on the other request control. for hand'we
the tradition
as PGM XIII:
For example we have cited PGM IV: 3039ff264) 242ff. We have already noted, other exorcisis often seem to
when discussing
in getting
demons to
names. Jesus
according
to thisstoryj
162 immediately
attributed interpretation is correct then
supplies
success been
but if our 8 of v. seek
Church successful.
had similar of religions (265) the name of demons. So on balance likely reflects that the demon's reported situation.
immediate
an historical
we understand for
in
we are many"?
Paul
passage "an anti-Roman (266) discernible comes to the fore"i Winter says that during the great in Galilee
Decima Fretersis
was stationed
story
legion
has its
locale,
(267)
and that
not only with
the
did him were to
was a boar.
Howeverl
Legions
(BJ he took Gamala IV: 13). when not restricted see the narrative the number of pigs to any one area. as making
Jeremias
a specific
connection
between
in a Roman
legion.
but in of
he cites
men.
a telos
of 2,048 ( u'js
- about)
significance
was attached
163
to the particular then to return number of pigs to the notion that in the herd. no specific It link is best was
intended
between
(2) in
Mk-5: 9 includes
the phrase
"because
the direct
speech of the demon. Luke on the other reply to one word "Legion" him% reply We should
limits "for
the demon's
of the tradition.
of religions with
to the nature
of this,
so far
name and nature. tlMy mame.is heaven, The phrase disclosing tradition Luke's Bairchoooch. I am he that sprang from
However we cannot
be sure
the form
the early
Church
A potential
difficulty
here in
is
change to
the demon's
111
164
obvious that the demon in
(vii). This
In verseslO in
for
leniency. by
element
introduced
as we have seeng other exorcism stories (270) ' And in view of this feature. the NT contained Church
the non-theological
nature
Mtt. 8: 29;
associated (271)
In Matthew is
punishment
(Mtt. 8: 29; Lk. 8: 26 and 29). is that simply being sent in this this
at least associated
tradition
punishment
request
some pigs
to the Jesus
decide
as an exorcist. is that
the pre-Markan
contained
episode.
as water
was understood
III
165
(viii) It remains for us to say something on the
(vv. 14-16).
14 fitting v. and made redundant well with not (273) that it might be a later by V-15It is possible addition (274) ' though there is no indication that Mark to the story is responsible for it. (2) Though we have so far episode from this in story seen no it is
reason
to divorce that
of attention
these
and particularly 275) (3) mind right of fear with to Jesus' (276) 4: 41e,
clothed,
to be
of this
leads that
essentially support
in its
also
Schweizerts
and apparent
than
that
belongs
we have completed
on Jesus-the-Exorcist.
III
166
3.4 The Syrophoenician (279) Woman's'Daugh-cer_ L. -
Matth. 15,tl. t$
Mark. 1, t4-30
bcdatv 6 'Iqook bqi24'ExciftvA dvaaft pnetv cis 1A pipq T6pou xal L68yov. gis T& 5pia. Tdpou
21, 46uv* Achive AW, n ital yvev" KcdOON dKodocoa Xavaval [Sob lxdl0k dw6 6p(wv YOV4IMPI a6TOO9, - -'. yuvh Tav Ftv ljdtoba lxpa Xiyouca - ! LIA. vwv 1 tlxev Tb hydTplov ab* Aau16Wpm A hydqp a6vpe, ul6s, pou 6alpOVIffal. 236 U aKdaam dwcxpMq wvtopa obic ItaxeD *s a6ij X4yov. xal 7rpoacAt6vTcs ol pgh.
TOICIOTOO4p6TOUVC[OT6VMYOVTtS'dw6TUOOV CIOTjV, BTI Kpd; tl 57nOttV APCIV. 246 aj ftaKplat, IIWCV. ()OlgftloTdArIV OFdwoXwA6T(l WPOUCKOM
21 Kai ljtMv
Aboaa wpouixtow
4 6kYuvh wp6s Toin w68as aftoo-281 *EXkqvi& lupofowlitivou yl - Kai TO x1youn. x6pic, PoAhlPOL 4piku kip&liov lxpdXqIx Tva COT& T6 286.81 dmoitpikis 3. 27 D"arp6S IlrM -aOTj* ctwtv- T4S GO* Kal
o6r.
tcrnv xaX6v Aciptiv T6v apTovTd)v
dolS WPCOTOV X0PTaG&AVUI T& TdXVC. 00
donv AapcTv ydp KaA6v T6v 214 &j iroISKuvcpIoiS. iriKvwv xa)Tols PaAcIv "A U PaAciv. irixvwv xal Kuvoploisdwtv. * Itople. COTO Ity9l dmcxpitn vak x6ple. Kai
xal y&pir&xuvdpia
KGI T& LVVdPIG" OW0KdTWTJS TpaWdC" ftb Tov *IXIWV Tiw WaIllov.
dpTov T&v
Wici dir6 T(Bv *ixiwv Tav 7n7ff6vivy folioumv dmbT4s TpawdqsTdbvKvpIwv cOnW. 29KCl 28-r6'rc brOKPINIs 6'lnaoos tfwcvaOTi-
dwtva4TI.
16yov Owwo Ral4luT6v .
& yoval,
Tw Vol
&A TOGTov
hydTnp
III
167
Again our particular by an attempt interest to discover in this pericope about is the was
motivated
something
three
following
section
yet
And
the context is
section (see
in the
of Jesus That
conveyed
least
to Matthew,
interesting Mis6ion is
are here
the question
of-food
that
highlights
the tension
(281) -
question
addition
of vv. 22b-24
Streeter
version
in M.
(282)
because
the words of Jesus and the word for word, that there
III
168
behind Matthew and Mark which contained
abbreviates
the novelistic
peculiarities
of Mark,
especially Secondly,
at the beginning
Matthew also insert3sayings in other places in (284) But we must explain the origin conversation scenes* of vv. 23 and 24, (where Matthew's story differs most from (1) These tw ice)q (285)
Mark).
Two things
are noticeable
two verses abound in Matthean vocabulary -41wiTax, ?, 4(286) (287) 0Y5; A4 1j. 4_1 Ci 'rYO ,f,
"'POIROrMY it with other
10
(288)
link he cf.
pericope in which
shows particular
of the Gentiles,
8: 5-13; mission
David, of his hand,
Jesus'
cf-10: 5ff-;
in his
these
two verses.
Although
there
is
substantial
agreement
between
21 and Mk-7: 24 it it is
seems that
Firstly
characteristic within
of Matthew a short
a peric6pe
phrase
at the
or construction
beginning
space,
- cf.
and end of
(290)
Secondly, because
probably
169 it was, both in-and (292) as a formula. out of the NT combined with Tyre, almost
V. 22
is
also is
substantially
different
there -a
a difference
in the way the woman is in Mark (7: 26) and a it need not be an obstacle his after source. G*D.
in Matthew Matthew
as reliant in
other uses, Canaan is employed as an equivalent (293) Phoenicia. But even if 'Canaan' was current as the
Semitic
equivalent
of 'Phoenicia
(294)
Kilpatrick. to this
The
turn (296)
As the villages and countryside(297) by Hellenism Matthew's alteration to the story from the Hellenists practical or to
To this
is probably for
to be added a theblogical in the OT the Canaanites, were the particular alteration. indicates $60" tr ( t of that (299)
Mark by Matthewl.
ir8
(300)
(kz, (vOS
(301)?
) C5,
at(
(302)
Uv)
Held
is
correct in this
and literary
more Jewish
r-
traits that
evidence
but
we are tran
planted
worlde that
agreemith take
Matthew first
the children
be fed"
because -
later
is is
insertion
into
that
(304)
(1) There
no evidence a later
addition
to Mark.
In view
of
to the lost sheep of the house of Israel'? - it o -only to use Mark's sentence on would have been contradictory sent
feeding
the children
simply
first.
left it
superfluous,
Mk-7: 27b
(v)
The last
verse
in Matthew's
pericope
(v. 28) is
also substantially
vocabulary and thematic ( TOTE
different (306L,
12S
interests
- notably
being healed
'in
that hour'(310)
hand. that
the mark -
Matthew's isolated
to which
he has added
(b)
to'a
number of features
III
171
.......... the ................. way that Matthew
of
has handled
............. Markes
pericope.
(i) to
thinks enter
that
Matthew
Jesus not
and Sidon as the woman is (312) Schweizer is the region. of Tyre the rt'STO( u V77 ,, in v. 21 saying says to Jesus
although
in v. 29 (/Mk-7:
31) Matthew
avoids
(Etc ) came out of the regionj on from there", is -and Mark's excised. to enter That
he simply reference it is
through for
Sidon
Matthew's is in line
Jesus not
the region
(ii)
The cry
of the woman is
AAL ...
Of the
8 occurrences of ! ALztv'
17: 15; 18: 33 (bis); 17: 15; 20: 30,31)
from Jesus. suggesting
healing
of whether-or emphasizes
the sufferer
in having
help
(iii)
The appellation-accorded
Jesus
is
0 Kr/occ
v'i'oS
In Das complete
re Israel dominance
W. Trilling of Matthew's it
accorded Christology. is
A )cvaivS (313)
J. D. Kingsbury "the
manner of an auxilary
christological
divine
authority
to
'Christ', (314Y
'Son of Davidt,
to asking
informing
In view of 'Lord' 'Son of David'. (315) it may be that the title case beyond itself to 'Son of-David'. is supported
This by 9: 27fis
to which
Matthew
drawing attention.
(316)
'Son of
Narrative
one of healing.
We will
Messiah
David'
whose role
is primarily
one of healing.
(319)
We have already
mentioned
of the to
and persistence
woman into
sharper
III
173
(v) V. 25. We have said ((ii) above) that the woman's
h4rtJesusI cry for help emp0s; -imotivated activity,, ses. -. -(-, -w by mercy. In using TTRor; Matthew reflects, both -vi <L. (320) on the divine character of Jesus, and the Gentile
woman's humble faith.
omission
of Mark's
and in prefacing
phrase accented.
to Israel #*crlv of
ku-v*Atcq
so that
to the dogs is
in line
with Matthew's
earlier
attempt
harsh perspective
on the Hellenists.
(vii) this
(321)
the whole
of-the
end of
pericope
emphasises
the Gentile
Son of David,
theme is emphasised in 8: 13 where another Gentile's is highlighted in contrast and to Israel's lack of
faith
faith(cf. 8: lo).
Matthew is serves
is
pursuing
itself it
certainly his
theological
purposes.
III
174
3.4.2 Luke has not used this
he otherwise
story.
The story
does
-
contain
themes to which
shows an aversion
the negative
Gentile
Mission.
and the
of the pericope f -
of Luke's
'great
as John Drury
by its second volume, not realized (326 ) he prophesied itoe. Thus we note that of the Centurion's kept 'off-stage', boy (Mtt. 8: 5-13/Ik-7: and'in all 21: 24 the of this "time is
in 1-20) of
right, -
of the Gadarene
demoniac
by the mention of the pigs indicates. a Gentile (328) However the demoniac from setting? was isolated Gentile co=unity and Luke would have wanted (not man Jesus) to include to his
his
to the healed
returning him".
to proclaim
3.4-3 Mark 7: 24-30. From 7: 24 to 8: 26 Jesus is on a (329) Gentile Mission. Mark usually begins his pericopes with koet"'
to indicate
III
175
times-Mark uses St'
only other
to start
10: 32 and 14: 1) they -Imply (330) While this pericope the story.
to the Gentile Mission in Mark,
Jesus'
Jewish
legalism
(7: 1_23).
is
not
decisive
for
v. 24,
(332)
introduction.
Whether extent
or not
Although4"
is KO O-OUM
indicator
of Mark's hand(335)Lue). s (336) It is'possible that the 1 responsibility, influence (337) "(338)
is Mark's
as this
and -tz
. as the phraBe begun with by a personal due to Semitic probably is ing nothing herself pronoun influence,-
probably is There
(339) this
whole phrase
including part
of Jesus clause
V. 26a is
probably
(341)
of this
This raises
story.
the question
can
- would
Church
a Gentile
III
176
to vv. 27f.? I think since Mark (342) in the Gentiles and Jesus' create this potentib2ly
that V-27a suggest
setting
it
is unlikely
interest
Mission(343)and
situation. a later addition It
would hardly
has already to Mark.
been said
Mark's hand, but the evidence is too slight that Mark is probably
Again build nature creating two verses in vv. 27-2 a case for
responsible
is little
for
this
there
evidence
The closing
also
show little
thometo(347) story
as an exorcism is
of interest
tradition
but has
reworked
introduction.
.. ........ . ..................
of this
There
in the -
a healing
a distance
dictates this
type stories
can be cited.
the Talmud
(and is
similar
to the healing
III
177
boy (Mtt. 8: 5-13/lk. 7: 1-10) b. Ber. 34b see
Centurion's
independThis Mk-7: 24-30 74 clearly story and are p. above). (348) It is then quite yet come from the same milieu. ent, reasonable lies to assume that behind at this Markan pericope that there
a story,
of an exorcism
a distancet
properly
belongs
to the earliest
memories
of the. historical-Jesus-
the-Exorcist.
Boy
(3450
178
Maft.
17,14-ti
Mmi6t.
14-ft
tuh. 1,37-4141
R abtfiv
Ta Ims ftb
kjpqt
go-
TOO apouj
H Kcd
Immvm 1160V
Wok
Toin
Panift
5XIOV YpqwaTtli =I
abTok W* 5XI"
Kcd Z;
.166vM aOT6v
- Ofts
wAs
RIMMOnm
wod
a6T#
Nm Go"Os ; "Nal CTI Is Too 5XIOU WOK4146 T6v vl6v pou wp6s IXOVM mopa
5= dav aft6v Kwuldh MOOG
3$Kaj 1&06
axAov 106nm dX6 TOO 4vgm ym- &MomL%4 Uopal aou IhnoAd#40 hd T& vl6v pou, 5n pon"11 Pal 18 &AovItal IMM ,* KCd 1600WVtOpa
lopoba KpKa * K91 P" italowagdoo GOTbv lud t1afOrm aOT6v PcTddOPOO MWPikV
dWOXWPCI dfaOTOG
d. V. ft
acm We 060
a6T6v.
dxpawc
Kal d
TovRaftlavowTva k"t neav. ud 06a.
41 ngp a
v aOOv hoamleat. 11L aK ji! oxq! kd t Ilk 6'C! Y(VC& affl(rfOl Kai III-
Mw
t" W6" wp6s6. lws w6Tt pcF 6. t(rTpappbM. 64J b4opot loopm; los dvitoput Us w6m pds w6Ts ; pim
VPCTd POO OPCOV; 06T& 4k
6ov; +dpgTt GoTbv W* PL
W*
opov;
we*"
fog alr6k Mwomolit"V66T6gotp6vio T6r4c6pa ToGlppntcv aOT6v KaiMimaOT6v cOT6v. Quvcaftpajgv abT6v, Kai owtowdPoler toKn Kai wtailv hd Tft Yk Immao
20%al k"av
a6Tbv
III
179
(Ma"h.. 17.14-211
"TO6. yiyowv
(W61,31-48al
W604K xp6voqiadv 6f
d TI kw% PoortoovAsiv. OT)wmoftiq If kft =6 Si lqoois dw" a6TO. T6 d savq Wdm kvaTt T4 , 6 waThp wwWown.11Wft jcpdjat 'MM6..
Too IM. Nou PC ucm. POOM 14 awwriq4 26 liev 46 Inooot
a"
6 Inook
it,tal
bn bm"dXu
5xM%
T* &RUN"
T# wwown
lqnk,
T# w"4wn
T# awki"
lbl4a iccd
MYNvako%76 alax0v salmoovilyt &* hwdom m% 1941h It aft W pqOn dqd&qt dw cOT6v.36sal de 46108T6gaqi6vm Kpdt" Kcdwolm awapdt" nfp hv - gal dy4vero iwd vt &we an "aam Too., Wou&f )*m 276R lqmk qwnlm Ift Xaok 06. Itak&v&q . w 1hpanOn 6 =Ff Too,W64mv
ftb
Tft
4" 1
"Kai dodftw"
48 jtjp!
TO ImMe Idea I INd * mo ad"L sid dwdusm abT6v &I WdM" ToG hoL M Tj
ydo6"M
aOTol ckoian olpa com we M il Audi Oh INg hrnp&w Wav a&& * 5n b* oda 17,6 L6G; d=v ab; je6 64 W AkvvOvnm dsOcAdv aW ; 39x@l yo abTois- M T4V 61rimcmcv pv- abmft*
bpiv, dv gxnTe wielw m X6ICK0V mvdrnw% iptite K ape Todilf. 11a00 W 6P4V yp Ad" mi PCTQMM 6 IW obav 46uvcem
d Vxmwiem av it in Kniovovdwcwt W" xat #e ovwpNv mn *d%mV$hm m)Vnniv il NMM - iM lntcoum av piv.
TOOTO 16 yh" IV 06AW Wvam dkN dA dv
III
180
Once again we are seeking to shed light on the
3.5.1
To begin
with
we should
note
three
agreements underlining in
16/Lk. 9: 40 against
Mk. 9: 18
Matthew Mark.
regarding
the agreement
in Mtt-17:
17 and
-k&-7'07S
zlTmv for,
to explain
except
J
Xrytt Lk. 24: 36, Luke case of of never uses (351) -1 Jesus Matthew than and also prefers rather cirrov "ITIIro&-. S has been added for clarity A40 0(352) 6 CE the the been brought as subject of verb, and -has
part
faithlessness
ness
of God.
Dt-32: 4bf.
and with-
111
181
iniquity, him, they just and right is he. They have dealt generation corruptly (zvLA
out with
are a crooked
and per7erse
use in. the early-Church and there (354) In Phil. number of echoes of Dt. 32 in the NT. adopts of the first in part of Dt-32: 5 and quotes (Ttvr('WS irKtX(,; and non-Christian that Dt-32 the last
the verse
the genitive
to contrast Also
the Christian
of interest
passages
used-in
of Dt . 32: 5?
Firstly, just
factors.
generation' above,
(a)
Mk. 9: 19 is
as Dt-32: 5 does.
Further,
as mentioned
contrast
be evident
in Mk. 9: 19-20.
generation.
hearers
generation Phil.
2: 15, as just
the Christiants
difficult
111
182
it is that on reading 4r0'110S, wr jr-vt"" allusion in Mark, to a -
how likely
passages or
what he thought
the verse.
Thirdly description
Matthew of the
Mk. 9: 21f.
-a
illness.
Matthew it
describing that
independently
shake the
3-5.2
In the section
16: 21-28: 20
of the disciples.
be and suffer... (359) (16: 21). And within the Narrative to the
example,
the Transfiguration
frightened
miracle
disciples
story
seems at first
to be misplaced
this
the
III
183
between the ending of. the story and its it general the
indicates
that
'discipleship
under
(a)
the story
the reference
- probably for
because
Matthew minimizes
their
faults,
them in a more favourable 8: 25; Mk. 10: 35/mtt. this. 20: 20).
The present
seem to coritradict
tradition, did
indication
the disciples
not
remain
(b)
is
It
before
that
an important
0 %porfopr5qC...
and concludes is "to direct
Aq, elv
his study
as a fixed
of it from by saying
formula
that
for Matthew
its intention event
(364)
attention doctrine,
unique
to in
the general
or rather,
contained
what follows'0365)
(c)
Apart
to the
'kneel
in
the NT always
have to do with
and expresses
or worship.
(366)
This is clearly
in
in v-15a he substitutes
III
184
for for this 'Teacherlt(367) Jesus' activity Once again is the his the motivation Matthew of his
'mercy'.
by including probably
father's
description
plight,
explaining for
motiv6s(see forward
P. 32 Sbelow)
bringing
There is
is
no suggestion
at this story
stage
Matthew
relating
an exorcism as having
(cf. v. 18).
describes
an unclean
the fire
rather
being taking
not
to be able
(e)
understand
Jesus'
rebuke
to
Mark intended
(9: 19),
takes
due to
rather
he also There is
this
In view
of what
111
185
Aor' use of the T;; of I Lyf( relevance of what
in Matthew, indicating
Matthew probably
the general
wants
the reader
to undermore widely
words of Jesus
to be directed
in the story,
for
any derogatory
Matthew
omits
not
consider
of Mark's to
in good taste...
preserve
made against
But Matthew mutual Hull
4
is
and efforts (370) the Messiah by demons?. reticent about colourfu32y Jesus and his an alternative omitting
of defense
not
antagonism offers
between
of exorcisme the
(Matthew
has Jesus
ignorant
suggestion
(Mk. 9: PP) to
the disciplesl
be unable
At last
in v. 18 Matthew
gives
clues
that
he is
111
relating an exorcism story. That is Matthew takes
186
up vTc*rOc4 embarrassed (see p. 33t
Matthew
of Jesus'technique,
he omits
the details
would It is
refle# not
Matthew
either
immediate
result that
takes
the first
refusehe omits -
miracles
8: Mk. 2? of --26.
(h) Matthew
the lad
Rather concludes
was'healed
than his
admit story
that
healing
language
(as _(). in he does
by saying
in 8: 13b; is
"from (372)
9: 22b; probably
and
15: 28b).
PIIe7rZV5I: r; Iv view of 8: 8,
a significant
(r4Titv)
remarks is linked
concluding formula healing in v. 16.
in
contrast
to the disciples'
III
187
W Matthew for takes up Mark's "I rrjaarr7,, YSU, (( indicating ... zTrr 0v of conclusion to the story -
the reason In
the disciples
inability
(Mtt-17:
19/Mk. 9: 28).
Matthew
is wider
Church.
about suits
as a mu tard
faith
(375)
3.5.3
Luke 9: 37-43a.
Luke follows
the Transfiguration
ministry (9: 51)-
journey is linked
of the Twelve
in his
theme of the
'Training
of the Twelve$.
In Luke's
is
i=ediately
apparent arguing
to the disciples
placing
the background
III
188
by removing Mk. 9: 11-13 (about-the coming of
Transfiguration Elijah)*-
the OT background
to the story
response by using
MAtOv(
as he uses it (377)
care.
Luke's
description similar
in essence
vocabulary. this
Luke is for
probably (i)
responsible
description
times
in the NT only
in, 9: 26 he forward.
(iii)
of the incident;
the boy is in line
(d) of Jesus of
In view
harsh the Luke does words consider whom (378) As with Matthew, Luke's omission to be directed? Against (Mk. 9.*19)
of 41b'v.
implies
that
it
is-not
the digciples.
following-
"Bring4your
son here",
immediately
upon Jesus'
reprimand
it
seems as if
Luke
(e) maintains
different
language, seiied
by the demon when confronted However Luke does not about the illness tell
Jesus
(f) exorcism
Luke story.
also But
maintains like
rVL&v s'7r(,
an the
Matthew
he does
(cf. Mko, 9: 25) nor the demon's (cf. Mk9: 26). 'k4"ca Also like
'W Jesus
healed
(380)
to a two stage
healing
story,
(g) be making
In line explicit
%4ith an interest
of his, at in
God
What can we say about story? 'training in a harsh redirecting the disciples. his (b, mercy c), We have seen that of the disciples'. light at all,
Luke's this
handling forms
of this part
exorcism
story
of Luke's
the criticism
of Jesus
(d)-exonerate (f),
authority (e)
no human aid
andperhaps
III
190
here, .
that
That he is
transmitting
interest
seems to be of no particular
to Luke.
(a)
It
is Bultmarn's stories
opinion
two miracle
have been
being and to brought
material,
Bultmann
it
is
make clear occupied between inability Vv. 21-27 unbelieving three play pieces
first
has its
of evidence.
The disciples
the father
though is
according
to v. 25 comes on the
scene for
the first
stories
here?
(i)
If
pass from
scene. after
v. 19a.
However, this
III
191
once being two stories for in other the-story. through stories characters
of there
and withdrawn
within
the latter
to be a single
entering
the story(pp.
147-634bov4-
of evidence it is
is
that
the
described* times,
- vv-17C-18a,
20b,
indicate
of stories
another
explanation
two (or
three)
'descriptions'
intelligible
as they
(1).
The first
it
his of
description
seize. s him,
teeth the and story
and wherever
and grinds beginning in
setting) in the
Mk-5: 2ff.
conforms of miracle
criticsit
analysis
stories.
(2)
in dealing
with
the other
exorcism or audible
stories,
a recurring
element
category
phrase
he (the (3)
demon) saw himeoelle in our examination that of exorcism part stories so far it
Also
an important
of the stories
192 was the exorcist knowing the demon by gaining its name
its
character.
That this
description manifest
of not
a question
"How long -
has he
been like
this? ",
mentions
for
require
explanation.
(iii)
Are there
two crowds
in
this
story takes
in v. 252
Bultmann(385)
Greek or difficult
in the papyrs(386)
of the word is
to determine.
a crowd is it
Taylor
says that
converging
that
says (388)
corresponds
a two story
of the crowd in v. 25 and it (389) to be the same crowd as in v. 14. it that the evidence hypothesis. of this story
we can conclude
(b)
involves disciples,
(390)
which in part
against the
a polemic
and as material
takes pay
up a considerable
amount of this
III
193
attention to Mark's
7
particular
interest
in
the disciples,
of 'this
theme here.
After in Mark's
discussing
what he thinks
are three
stages to Jbsus -
portrayal
relationship Rejection,
assiduously
in a vendetta
the disciples.
But there this point
He is intent
with
on totally
this thesis.
discrediting
(1) Firstly,
them".
and
(391)
are problems is
in any given
adversaries
from this
continuing
debate
ending
to draw too many conclusions Trom the present (393) (3) Mark. As Quesnell has pointed . of out, much does not fit Weeden's thesis and this
.. is most evident
of attributing
at points
inconsistencies
(ii)
J. Schreiber, that
(395)
as Weeden,
Mark is conducting
has reassessed on the role says "what
the disciples,
in Mark 13: 37
E. Best as taking
where Jesus
111
194
"Jesus' intended who would teaching for the as Mark views few, ... followers; then it was not primarily for all
be his is
to be examples if
(398)
to show that
an
he would against
up another
as he, has--not
done
the so we are unable to argue that Mark was attacking (399) Where the disciples disciples. appear in a negative perspective give Mark's further they do so as foils This so that Jesus can go on to
instruction. (eg.
redaction
motif comes not only from (400) 7: 17; 8: 3), but it was also present
in '.
his
tradition-(eg.
(4ol)
So Best
to understand
attitude
towards
may be grounds for suspecting (402) the disciples. But we should in these categories
says Best,
understood,
be seen in regard
contrast
And with
Mark wanted
to explain
he should
show
the results
appeared involved
tradition campaign
the disciples.
111
195
(iii) We should now return
its UL'
'disciples'
In
in
and discuss
view SUV"
vocabulary
OlKos, kark
177100-74, interest
L
particular ending
shown
in
this
to the pericope.
to this
is
005) kind of demon only being able to be cast out t'v 7rjPo9'zuA-q ,
not Markan for technique Exorcist he does not of healing, show prayer as an -
probably
or in anyone elses
who is simply invoking a (406) The reported technique (407) anointing this with position oil not prayer. in Mark's of the
were in to tell,
though
in view
of faith'in
the pericope it
in this
concluding*sentence
For, though-it in Mark's is
existed
traditiont
would
have been omitted in the probably (408) This tentative tradition. conclusion gives story. us an indication Using-the disciples of Mark's possible
story
on this
as examples
Secondly,
(These verses
the introduction
can be isolated
to the story
as the introduction
story
proper begins).
111
196
active here - note ? )15AOtt C" j ), e r.
! TIC 'Pti-rcyU
(409) 0
The question
then
is
of Mark's
pr6bably be part this
Markan.
Reference
of meeting
could with
connection greatly
I cannot
determine.
ama ed on seeing
could of the Transfiguration (411) be on the face of Jesus still mil t be discounted (412) (2)'Mark because (1) no such hint is dropped by Mark. something of the glory would have created verse an obvious contradiction between this
were coming down the mountain, no one what they had seen.. *" contrast to
he charged
(Though perhaps
v. 15 was designed
in deliberate
this glory'
44f.; 1: - cf.
and 7: 36).
is an appeal to a detailed
on the face of Moses in Ex. 34: 29. While a general parallel between the confusion (413)
be possible, the-first place
at the foot
the parallel
in detail
result
greeting
be a deliberate to highlight
intended it
Jesus'
experience
Moses but
does at least
warn against
trying
III
197
only a conjectured
offered by Taylor,
parallel. (414)
The naturalistic
the amazement is inadequate. sensation
that
appearance
of Jesus
seems rather
to accompany being
of Jesus
Robinson to Mark's
by the
(415)
within
about suffering.
in
is (416) it
reflected which is
to Jesus
in Mark's this
Can we of'
element
to the strata
reminiscences
of the historical-Jesus?
In relation
it
motif.
parallel
as we have
indicated
from this
authenticity. to posit
so easily
the earliest
Thirdly
the
theme of
'the
disciples'
reappears
in vv. 18b-
111 19a. That Jesus is meant, in his rebuke to the 'faithless generation', to be addressing the disciples is clear from
198
the use of., &To? (cf. v. 20a) whichl being plural, can only 'f to the disciples refer or the crowd - but the crowd is not the focus of attention indicates of this that here. And the conclusion of
pericope of interest.
Mark who is
responsible here.
and their
inability
predisposes
reference cry
desperate
of Jesus
(in (3)
the father.
in healing either
that
of those
of the sick
on their
behalf
(2: 5;
if
it
9: 19 was intended
would
to be directed
to this
be an exception for
pattern.
heightening
the reference is
so integral in Mark's
to be found
Our conclusion
regarding
it
was probably
present
in
199
the body of the story part of the introduction), by Mark. (vv. 18bf. are likely to have been may
the ending
of the pericope
of the disciples
(c) focusing
more generally to it
at this
pericope,
contribution
of elements authentic
the story
belonging
to the strata
historical
recollection.
(i) three
We have already
offered
for
the
descriptions
We should
conform
elsewhere
no early
(ii) original
rebuke
by Jesus that
in'v.
191belong
to the
We have argued
the early
Church - as
represented in this
doubt
by Matthew and Luke, saw an echo of Dt-32: 5 (420) such a conclusion casts saying. For some
being in the earliest material. However
on the verse
different
the saying
the pre-Markan
III
200
in someone coming to Jesus/the Church Dt-32.5 in early communityl
of faith but
in the early
characterize
of faith
(421)
As v. 24 deals it is
with
the faith
and How-
probably
pre-Markan in being
origin foopity ,
community,
are difficult
show Jesus
in that
he causes
to be associated
with
the original
Uv) "E'TrC T
V. 25 is rv, is
the report
of Jesus'
exorcistic
Jesust
words which
The commad of Jesus. is I command you, When dealing particular the detail
Mk-5: 8 we noted
reasons
Church
should
of the address
to the demon. And on the other hame in exorcistic (422) convention. incantations We conclude the
hand the use of the demon's was a long then that and well this
established
element
historical (2)
III
201
well known in the magical seeking to control command you, literature in the context of
also
incantations
For example
PGM XII: 171 has "I great you; god... for ";
I am.. o11(423) So this . command. Before the next part of'the enter
vocabulary origin
we shall
In dealing
with
the
Babylonian ancient
(p. 16 above)
was illustrated
how the a
world
believed
in the re-entry
of a demon into
person.
arrest
In PGMIV: 3024f.
a free-ranging
there
seems to be a provision
it entering
to
demon to prevent
a person
"let -
in Mk. 9: 25 is a recognized
and Jewish prescription material. for
Eleazar
(Josephus
to come-back
him ... "oThe demon with IV: 20) "swore and never take that
which
was dealing
he would
technique parallels.
point,
an accepted to discover
pattern a precise
difficult
convention
202
that is being
Axvl
followed;
5zcv (or
Josephus
ZlS
-(VI-ro'-p
in some manuscripts
IrLAqs -(-r-c
in v. 25 is
25 The of v. whole .
in found its not entirety. only The in a
nowhere paralleled
(Ant. 8: 47),
also
in a prescriptive
incantation apparently
the magical
papyri
(see p. 40fabove)
and also
to be thoroughly
of Jesus' to adhere exorcistic
to a literary
Finallyq this
of Jesus'
9: 42) it is
we can be fairly
Confident
a genuine
of the violent
world (5: 13)). here and it Again (4: 35)
of demons were common in the ancient in other of Matthew in stories of Jesus (Mkol: 26; reticence
in view this
element
the story
witnesses.
closely to remind
Christian
(see Acts 2: 24,32; 3: 26; (425) the 13: 33f.; 17: 31) and power to*awaken the dead, fomulation, if not the content of this verse, may have of Jesus' resurrection
III
203
after to note Easter. that (Over against these points it is was
the use of the hands in healing world that it would i4act (426) be
section
with
of
(1)
bringing
contribution in this
as well belong
(2) as
tracing
elements
The contribution
which we may have some confidence, could have been either especially brought for into this ability
this story
elsewhere
or created
the light
of v. 19. In orderb*focus the disciples' Jesus' Mark's rebuke special it inability (v. 19) from contribution with
on Jesus' is
as an exorcist by redirecting
highlighted
concluding early is
an application
appropriate
Church.
possibly
historical
pericopel
the rebukeg
technique,
departure
of the demon.
III
2o4
4")rl) 3.6 The Beelzebul Controversy( '-f"
(Mk. 3: 22-27 and Mtt. 12: 22-30/Lk. 11: 14-23)
mafth.
12,2f-30
a64
rame Tbv m4& Baqlavlou ImAqm 6 aOT6v, 13KCd 064ft laxetv Kai ol Kcd . * of bxAm MoTawo Ndwgs ol aXA01 RG*wM Kai Ucyov- p4n obT6s d- xhvvm- 06uwolt I+denv 6 As Aculk 21ol U ooplauto (FQMCS OOM 069 dltp&UG C17rOV' T& kip6via cl p4 ly TO BcdWoOA a Itod- 134
vq oonn iv ii'lapailL
ol M (polli(Mrol
IXCYOVIV
iv
licodJUn
Tik &mpvla*
...
23Kai
wpoaxaAcedpoos 17C6A1 k a6m(n iv wapapoka I. &mipm ACYCVGOTOiS '7F&S66VGTGJ dim ac-ravft oamvdv IKWAev; 24Kai I&V PGOACIG pcplaoj, 06 W OTaNim A pumAlla VGTQM lxdvn- 26xal Mv If lam* oildo 14' tau* 06 6gy4mm peploot i4 011da
glain04evit
wdua PacnAda:
wavaPamlefu fir famv &Gpcpla&trGa fpqppofcn W OINOV wflffeL RalOINK led ai Itai 6
Kdvq oa&faOlKaW6 dwcrcrTavft itplmil If laUT6V KCd Gan, b66&wm TOAS 1XIL CAVGI
ahcrctcn ab%wm A acnxcia aftoo, lri ymdv 10ei 81 6alp6V1CL T Xavpf iYisiv
W T 6(nPdvta , 01 0101
III
205
(Mafth. 1 opav dv Tm dKpd)aou(nv; ,8A TOOTO GOTOIKPITGI Iopwv CIOVTGI hoo WVCOPCM cl of Ily byid
(Mark. J, tt-t7l
Ruk. 11.14-15.17-231
6pew IV TM IKP&Uoumv; 816 TOOTO aOTOI OprAVKplTUI IGOVTC[t. 209184 IV Sofyf lxOdA NT61(* hoo )a Td Balp6vla, dpa loft dev
TIS clallativ
, jaovTaQoToo-'2Iw&v6k lcrxup6TIpoS
6(MT6Vlapp6v
W T6" Thv olKlav abToG 6iaprd00 . 30*op4QvpcTjpo8 lar, 1poo 1(mv, Kai 6A
T6V Iupbv
NV
6ta6i6w. T4V oildcrv abfoo 61apird- Ta crKaAa(16TOO m a. 23,0 A rov pcf Ipoa KaT' lpoO lonv, Kai 6A M!Vdywv pre Ipoa oxop.
(mopQuvdywv PeeIPOO Au .
11
This
is
passages
relating
it-some
possibility
of Q containing
Charge (Mtt. 12: 24/Ik. 11: 15/Mk-3: 22j cf-30) understood . and so we must attempt
What was meant by the term Beelzebul, come? We should Jesus' technique also ask what this
in exorcism
and his
on those
to the idea
of the fall
But we should
begin
clear
the The is
and extent
complex. as it
of the complex
learn
with will
-(428) In juxtaposing q.. Mark and the Q tradition we _ be noting not simply the differences between the
but how the differences to be characteristic is not possible follow of these to arbitrarily tradition lines traditions. assign
to a particular discussing
or redactor. we should
tradition
and establish
the extent
of the Q tradition.
(a) Matthew
Mtt'l:
24U.
11: 14. It
is
fairly
clear
that This is
reworked
these
particularly doublet
into
also
evident
in the demoniac
111
207
as well as deaf. (i) The healed sw;, man is described
blind
as a d=b
Of all a precursor
in the OT is
of sight
to the blind.
is pertinent
to notice
that
the only time where the theme of the reception occurs in the OT it reception
has already
of speech
is twinned with
of sight
shown an interest
of the predominant
is that Jesus fulfili-,
to pursue
(eg.
Mtt. 1: 21f,;
2: 15,23;
to heighten
an already
with this
Messianic
is that
healing
and so alter
Q. Uv)
Consonant
interest Mk. =4
about
Finally,
as mentioned
parallel
reworking 32-34
and 12: 22
against
Lk. 11:14-15 -w
III
P-o8
that
.....
we are dealing
......
with
Matthean
vocabulary.
amazement in of a
though is it
in favour
seems to be a type
of response
to miracles
that
Matthew uses
reworked
this
parallel
passages
enables would
From this
involved talk,
a dumb demoniac
being
so that
amazement.
thinks It is,
that
this
miracle
is
he says, created
"deliberately this
support
seems to be;
"Afterall,
in the saying,
sayings (were)
(439)
any setting
It
is
true for
that
story
the pericope,
as both
an exorcism,
shown that
not Q material,
nor that
111
209
is dependent is that on the other. this in exorcism The most important was created not in because the setting".
Fuller
church
the saying,
they were it
And how is
agree
on the setting?
On Fuller's the
and/or
If
it
Matthew
Q tradition
point
contained
a brief
exorcism story
is healed,
at this
(b) ) (: agree
Firstly
was levelled
by whom? As Matthew seems concerned to make the Pharisees (444) Jesus' opponents and as proper names tended to enter (445)
the tradition during its tran mission That against Luke probably best preserves the Q tradition. the accusation is, some of the Secondly, Ik. 11: 15b
crowd directed
Jesus.
of the accusation?
Comparing
with Mtt-9: 34b Q appears to be best preserved In view of Mtt, 12: 27/Lk. 11: 19 'Beelzebull
Q here. reference Thirdly, There is no evidence 'having' similar for thinking
in Ik-11: 15b. in
was probably
that
Beelzebul
to Mk. 8: 11 rather
(447)
and so it
(c)
Jesus"Reply
11: 17ff-)-4)
(having
Matthew
mentioned of
(448)
reply
thoughts),
the saying
Satan being
a Lukan explanation
that it follows
derived
on rather for
, _ the view that Luke is awkwardly supports (450) (iv) this intrusion. Mtt. 12: 27f. /Ik. (451) almost exact parallels (v) In
Luke following
or is
Q (while
he reworking of Q here
the order
is uncharacteristic of Luke to rewrite Mark (453) so extensively and if he was here reliant on Mark
it is surprising that There he has only is taken up o cirXvASS
t 3,
into
(: r a-Ka-), x
aeiroD-
)-
to IS-53: 12a Luke does not follow (455) does. Thus it a tradition here,
text that
other
than Mark
- probably
Q.
211 (d) F'r'o'm''t'h'e''e*n'd'of'Mtt'. becomes. less probably in certain. its Ik-12: '1'2': 30/lk-11: 23 the order of
10 (Mtt. 12: 32/Mk-3: 28f. ) is in Luke "where with the it has a catch saying (456)
Q position
Ik. 11: 24-26 in the context in which Luke has it, Luke is (457) Lk. 11: 27 is unconnected with probably following what follows and in Matthew the Beelzebul pericope does
6.2 -3..
If
of
Q, and we set it
in Mark stand
is introduced
coming to seize
a reference, to
they is said all but
himself. is unlikely
The authenticity
by the
early
Church(459)
reference vv. 31ff.
a similar supplying
also preserves
of Mark he-,
In view
(see,. below)
as the introduction
to
(b) Mark (v. 22) has the scribes making the accusation against (462) Jesus. Again in view of Mark's desire to make the (463) scribes Jesus' opponents and the tendency for (464)Me., tradition to take on proper names, Mat the o-is wdecabon
212 Mark may be responsible (c) That Jesu is is said for naming the accusers. (i by of the early of the
to be j)osesied
Beelzebul Christian
(465)
unlikely
cf. Matthew
by our comparison
probably (e) It
sayings
(466)
power-authority,
of Mark's evident
interest
in
it
is most unlikely
that
this
to
Mark. (f) That the parable tradition of the Strong is suggested Man was in by its parallel this context position
Mk. 3: 28ff.
but here it is is
in Q different
question form of for the
a different which is
(468)
not
whik
in Mark's for
tradiCtion. that
good reasons
thinking
in Mark is
secondary.
III
are parabolic,
are not.
The introductory
words in vs. 28, "Amen I say to you, " suggest an (469)independent logion. 3. The parabolic 1 originally
discourse has given belongs thio lack no hint in its imagery that thought
in vs-30
to be interpreted: spirit.
the Beelzebul
controversy
with
by identifying
contrasting (470) in Jesus". from Mark's belongs thus
Beelzebul
it with
tradition unit
here.
vv-31-35
to Mark's tradition
3: 19b-35
do not belong
in Mark's
as
to the Beelzebul
................... in Mark's
extended
3.6-3
intended that
by his
Mark utilizes
material
"so that
III
214
between Jesus Mark's (i) intention? In vv-31-35 and his Probably (472) relatives'!,, not. Consider is intended But the between
fo'Llowing.
no contrast
Jesus'
is
family
(473)
there
is to
no adversative
be compared with
where Jesus
to use a
(ii) There is no other to visual aid make a point. (474) of Mark to the which suggests an "animosity evidence (475) What have is do here Jesus". we a clear of relatives misunderstanding without alleged beside portrayed of fact in Jesus' no early family. narrator thought him". (iii) would have that Jesus was (476). did
the family
at Nazareth
be that
Mark thought
appropriate
to place it
'possessed'
here for
were thought
(b) to play
redaction
shows that
vv. 28ff.
of the Q saying
(478)
to be subject v-30
severe specific
we would
have expected
to be more reworked.
and vv-31ff-
ft
215 on the
parable
the strong
house is
plundered.
the binding
.. is .... Temptation
will least if find in
na ratives. Md
both
binding
plunderingl'at
Mark,
could
as referring that
the binding
man in v, 27
obviously
of binding of dealing
and healing.
healing
by demonic man can be bound or fettered (481) Also the progressive pattern of v. 27, and then plundering, demons illustrated, for fits the form of in the
example,
216 magical papyri: first giving the adjuring directions to bind or restrict
individual is the
at stake is
(3: 23).
in, Mk. 3: 27 is
of an exorcism. house, is
person, for
taken
then*no
thinking na rative.
any of this
parable
refers
to the Temptation
From what we have said we can say two things accused Jesus' of exorcising source
of
this
in particular. by Beelzebul, is
of power-authority Jesus is
the Holy
Secondly,
in exorcism
defeating
Satan.
this
parable
reflecting
words The
can be considered.
is still
preserve
parable sayingcof
to the authentic
III
217 3.6.4 It must now be asked what the and how that the fact material _Q material that can tell
us-about
Jesus-the-Exorcist
presented
established a brief
the Q
information
(a) while
Luke describes
the healing
Matthew
in 9: 33. This predisposes us towards thinking that Q used 3q, -(485) I CmA. as the word to describe what Jesus was
doing in his exorcisms. We will discuss this word a littld
more fully
of the
exorcism
indicates' technique in
special it is this
in Jesus'
of exorcism nature is
but
also
that
primarily
to what follows. is
That
of a dumb'spirit
overtones
the as one
of exorcism
of the hopes of the Messianic sing for joy (Is-35: 5 and 6).
dumb would
originally
(b) What did the charge in Mtt. 12: 24/Ik. 11: 1 (487)
mean? Did Jesus' audience think
that
he
foreign
god to affect
his exorcisms?
(489)
the notion
of 'Baal
that
'Beelzebull
is a
Zebubt, (i)
1: 2. But
the connection
Outside
mentioned
and Hippolytus
of Heresies
Josephus
Fly-God
of Akkron to render
(Ekron)"
traditionally
to know of a connection
A possible and a term 'Be6lzebull. clue to the meaning of (492) Beelzebul is in Mtt. 10: 25 - "If they have called the ma ter malign of the house Beelzebul, those of his household". how much more will Though it is rare they in the
OT (1 Kings8: 13 =2
found
the Hellenistic
period
especially
of Antioches
In lat"er
Now in Jud ism and the NT pagan gods (496)were said to be demons.
"What better name then for Satan, the chiqf of the
only to Yahweh*
OT writings (495)
III
219
demons than He could this not title that of the chief of the heathen by his proper gods? name this nnme
of course is
be called
restricted
to Yahweh - but
disguise Gaston
at in a slight
accuse
of being
inspired
by
use, -Beelzebul
Baalshamaim understood
by Jesus
and his
and inspired
is Jesu'
reply
(i)
to the
out demons by Beelzebul. two verses is impossible for need not for that
detain
Jesus would
by Satan, exorcisms
against
and his
out
the inconsistency
by whom
is
The question
would
111
220 only two alternatives, here is said in Satan the next or God).
supplies There is
(500)
a problem Jesus
verse his
to claim
that
their contemporary exorcistsand C In Q's present arran ent with vv. 19 and 20 it has generaUy is that Q felt been thought that that the
the exorcisms
(501)
_
Creed
for
to Bultmann's from
hypothesis . of
that
v. 19 is
a late
the "controversies
the early
But even if 'late' it
community with
the reference was still part
its
Jewish opponents .
exorcists that
(504)
is Matthew of
the present
order
so that Ik. 11: 19 and 20 are no longer of little help for the problem would of Q's still re In
of the Jewish
exorcists
is
however
another
so far, Therefore,
III'
all
is that
authority as allies
they in some way share the same source of poweras Jesus. This notion of Jesus tolerating others
when we note
positive
doublet
disciple's) from
Thus Q is exorcists
whom he as allies.
to some extent,
Then comes Mtt. 12: 28/Tk. 11: 20 - one of the most verses we shall deal with; tTut if in a spirit/
of God I cast
out demons,
then
the Kingdom of God and interpreting the ministry including Why in Q are of the -
of Jesus,
we must face
a myriad
of problems in Q? the
of this linked
verse with
inbreaking
(i)
There
is
no need here
to completely
rehearse
111
222
taking
'Spirit'
as
of the variants
(507)
(ii)
of Jesus This
with
the
.... ..... .... ... . ... ..... ........... God? ....... the ........ inbreakin King dom of g of components, exorcisms attached the source (Spirit), to these
of power-authority
and the meaning the inbreaking of Jesus of the linked the in the Spirit these two with
Kingdom of God. So, are the exorcisms the coming of the Kingdom because exorcism of God? options? or because Jesus performs Or do we in fact
It
is
generally
recognized
that
in
this
Jesus about
which
said
Exorcist
..... Jesus"source
............ , , of power
as it
operating there
exorcists
to Jesus' is,
unknown. (note
in contrast I
the adversative
) Jesus
III
223
wAs the, Spirit of God which provided him with his power-
it
authority.
Rabbis'
The Spirit
sources
of power-authority.
as Ican
tell
Jesus.
not
everywhere
in the NT to emphasisl(510)
as implying says -
or used for
Jesus is
the emphatic
xlyto'
found
promises of His
of Jesus
(Mtt. 8: 9/Lk-7: 8) it
Jesus.
is to draw attention
that
to the person of
of the in
Jesus' casts
out demons.
11: 20
is
put
on the lips
of
word is along
to decide,
with
in Tobit (4r&X(J).
When we take
elements
11: 20 - casting
is,
Satan (Mtt. 12: 6/M. 11: 18) - the enemy o God) and
III
L. C-7T
DL ,n,
the coming of the Kingdom of God, the LXX's may be useful in conjecturing the implication
chosen people
Israel,
is cast out
,,
be fulfilled.
the promised drive
of
I
them out
"The eternal
and underneath
Destroy.
of grain
may be that,
Godts purpose
What can we say about That the saying likely rightly from
of this
seems quite
the following.
theme of the public was a central ministry (512) (2) The fact that the Kingdom of God is Jesus. said to have already, (513) 400, (": a-xv), come Iwhich
'Kingdom'
corresponds
to
Jesus'
(cf.
own ministry.
the verse
111 an antithetic (515) speech. dawning below). paralldlism (4) The early with -a characteristic church Jesus did not of Jesus' associate the
225
of salvation
exorcisms
discussion
attention
of the Beelzebul
to Matthew of it. and
drawing
unique
and understanding
Mark the
the present of
12: 23 so that
exorcisms.
reversed. pericope
relevance
of it.
The parable
Spirit
the word of God and keep it") gathering readers with in their is
Luke is
encouraging
his
of exorcism. with
F67 MarkJesus-
the-Exorcist possession
charged hence in
(3: 21f, ),
league
an unforgivable,
blasphemous accusation
(3: 29)-
226
3-7 The Temptations
(Mk. 1: 121 13 and Mtt. 4: 1,21
(516)
4: 19 21 13)
ii/Lk.
Manh. 4,1.2, ft
MWLI, lf-ls
12Kal dfk T6 wvdpa Ck T4VIRWV.
"00416"m
LuL 4,1.2J3
a6l6v ImAd"
vlwm)mtw4ml
VORM Tioaqwxom,
Ticap"am
IV
Ta 44"
Is kdm
Ompov twdvam.
Tg"npdwm KcA boupOwm. 6pcv(n 6A 4v a6m wopa; Too ad 14am amb IV =FS 4pdp" lalva" W awmkahwav ubviiv kdvaam
lb4xn
Rd M VOW
dyt"-
wmd
vAli
xd Vo9v
sw
for
drawing of it
to this to answer
question defeated,
the various
traditions)
in the Temptations,
the exorcismsi
the cross,
or at some future
time?
3.7.1
does not defeated
For a start
intend in
it
seems fairly
idea that
clear
that Luke
the Temptations
he says that
left
Jesus until
confirmed
when we look
is referred
to at (8: 12);
10: 18;
III we have an indication active throughout that that Luke thought of Jesus. that Satan was
P-27
Conzelmann's
contention
3-7.2
Regarding Matthew's view of the relationship and the fall of Satan the situation to 'go$ tx; Ov' and However
-in v. 11 he 'leaves'
the Temptations.
3.7.3
as the defeat we are
If
neither
of Satan,
Temptations
in Mtt. 4: 11a/1k. 4: 13 to the devil (519) However the second part of the ministry
(1: 13) though
of the of the
3 (6oV'
does not.
Mention
Mark,
Matthew
comes from
his
from
in #(cyos
the phrase likely this
most If
who adds
correct
the
Q Temptations
probably
ended only
with
a simple
reference
to the devil
111
2? -8
Jesus. From this we can hardly conclude that in we have expressed of Satan. the very from important other Q material,
leaving
In factl
and Luke,
we gain
the distinct
Beelzebul
(p. Atibelow),
portray
enemy but
the process
of being
defeated.
3-7.4 is attached
initial Best in it
It
is E. Bestts
of Satan an
to the Temptation
tion there there
evidence
the result
says we
This
now we look
of the Temptation
immediate
context.
Even if Baptism
there
is
internal pericopes
evidence exhibit
suggesting different
that
the
and Temptation
these
as contributing expect
each other
and we might
III
PP9
between them on the part of Mark.
understanding
pericope
is
a mere two-brief
difficult
When we observe
of Satan(526) of
of Mark there
seems to be a consistency
charge
In 8: 33 Peter attempts
mission and the retort two references
to deflect
is
"Get behind
Thus these
of the Sower.
other
occasions
in a3_1 -
the Pharisees.
8: 11 is
Jesus for
a sign
to prove
by throwing
So perhaps
we have in activity in
1: 9-13 the
as having
an attempt
to deflect
Best alone
says that
on the basis
we would
be entirely
ignorant
of the angels
in a trying that
periodl
Mark is
assuming
a positive so. If
light that,
reference
- simply
the safe
through
period.
Hence not only does the last us from our earlier that suggestion, it
part but it
of V-13 not deflect confirms mission the ideal that was that Mark
in Mark's Temptation
was Jesus'
at stake. immediately
to Jesus, mission.
So there from
is
in Mark's but it is
Temptation, not
discerntble or the
the binding
it'is'sus"overcoming*Satan*in
the preaching of the Good News mission, (530) So none of the Snoptic traditions cf. 1: 1).
III
231
of'Satan being represented in the
story.
III
232
matth. 1111-6
2*0 M 'Iwdvvqs XPIOTOO dwoocas IV T4 Uopwyn* Ti Ipw TOO
MarL I
18 Kai dwiyyokvlw" MfMff3aim 4&406"a 6 lod"
Luk. 1,1843 at pa&Maj cloToowepi wtvmv KW Wj)O=dAadpCVo-j lbo Tvvft T6V PaNffff
11 lwcp*cv wpbs r6v Itiplov xt"V ob cl 6 lpx6pgvm J &wv wpoo6olicaptv: lowup Pml M wPbVck& ol Upes alwav- *Iwdvvm 6 PawnW* MOTCAIv APdl WP61 ci Alyov- ob if 6 IpX6pc &Mv WPO60!ftgv; a' IV fical" Tj rapq OlpdWevotv womoin 6W6v6mv Kca poartywv Xai T#CupdTwv WO pow ital rj*Aofs woAkofs ixapiawo Porciv. a itai *wol(plotiql lo" & Am civ, awaWtilan ilwcv GoTols. ImpeuMm xal Axodom - TV+101 6VOPIdWOV-
icpihis 6'Iqcocn ilwcv gT0it- wopfuhm 'lwdwq a dicom ical xdwm- 4tv410i aveoldwog. xnoi KaecpKovm Kai aiv Kai xwxoi 11Pllraloocnv , Ical vticpol dycipov-rei Igel wno. 1[W4oi agodouaiv, 6axion iv dpoi.
aimKai .4 dwayycmn
AgWi KC&GPKOVM KGI XWXOi WtpnMOO01Y, WTW Kw4Oi dRodaveiv, VtKpol lytipovTal. Xal a*u xal paxdpok lonv k ibv p4 cocciv. kkall tv dpoL
briefly spirits
consider
this
pericope
because
is mentioned
we need to discuss
the origin
passage may have to do with relation of this to his passage. activities We will
self-understanding
the historicity
to these
3.8.1
The Q, tradition.
It
is fairly
clear
when comparing
the Q introduction
to this
III
233
pericope
contained
a reference
hearing Luke) to
to Jesus
or should
we expect
another? "
Lk-T: 20-21
does not
appear
in Matthew.
That
this
material
was originally
part
could be indicated by _q (532) ' in leaving in a repetition of Lk-15: 21f; Lk. 19: 34) are (533) biblical On the style.
of a number of points
these (537)
(cf.
to traditional
cumulative
that
hand the
conclusion
impact
leads
two
(perhap_s)
Luke-is (534-) Si
CW
verses.
(a)Troel-epyacft, 10 (5319)
r 7.
and
?,A
seem to indicate
(b) V. 21 is an awkward addition into the Lukan redaction. (542) (c) It is probably-Luke who is responsible for context.
the aorist in v. 22 (EiTz-a jxdv'#'Qrrr wl' cf. Lk. 10: 23-24/
of John can indeed report (543) Our conclusion what they had seen and heard. the disciples
the Q tradiion responsible evil spirits" is best for the preserved in Matthew',
ve
camment in a m=ent.
III
.
The introduction to this question indicates that activity
234
pericope(545) as arising
John's 11: 2;
out of the
we look directs
for
attention
to what can be seen and heard miracles. But it is not that to prove his
including is simply
Jesus status,
to the miraculous John to see that is said shall the point. to the
echo - Is-35:
be opened,
shall very
no'reference of affairs
figure(546)
It
is
this
state
of affairs
that
Jesus
is
said
to went 5/
allusion - all
is good news
so that
is not the messenger but the good news which is being preached (54T) But as the climax of the core of the reply to the poor. comes with is a reference to Is. 61: 1 there in the is activities is the hint of the but the that Jesus
not without
good tidings
III
235
(548)
This
c'onclusion
is
climax refers
23) which
people
Thus for
Q the miracles
the kingdom has come and in turn of the One who performs poor. .
reflects
identity to the
the miracles
and preaches
Matthew
up this
Q perspective,
but
While
Q seems to have
in a context that emphasised Jesus' (549) Matthew has placed it in the 11-13) so that is
and the Kingdom are twin themes and in turn Jesus (550) in word and deed. Christ Luke has made the addition and plagues of 7: 21 - "In that
he bestowed
and evil spirits, and on many that (551) This addition highlights sightti. of what John's directs disciples
to what Jesus was (552) of Jesus' status. that Luke includes of the evidence/
to be noted spirits
from the
as part If
Coming One.
we note
10: 18 (see to
4: 40f. ) it as particularly
understanding
III
2-36
of the
This
relationship
between be
exorcism, explored
and the
Kingdom will
IV below. -
3.8-3.
pericope
If
Luke is responsible
us very But vhat passage? little
for
7: 21 then this
understanding of the explored
can tell
about Jesus'
question "question
the if
coherence
by a postat least
really
as an answer to disciples
posed b
If important
this
conclusion
is
correct
then
it
provides in which
an
corrective
or balance There it
to the is his
saying
Mtt. 12: 28/Lk. 11: 20. focus not poor Jesus. of attention only
exorcisms
are the is
in relation but
Here it
particularly
preaching evident
to the for
in which (54)
eschatological'reim
III
237
(555) 3-9 The Disciples' Mission(s)_ (Mk. 6: 7-129 30/Mtt-10: 1-1/Lk. 9: 1-6; lo: 1-11,17-20)
matth. 10,1
Mark. 6,7
I Luk.9,1
zu"aug4pm.
44 irobl id.
ao, robs-Amontutiv Wo No 18WKEV a6TO Kai 181800 a6TOTS -, Iloualav 7rvcupdTwv hah llOu(qav-Tdw ilogeiciv hd wdvT0 Nmudnm *v it 601u6 TWV 650C lxodxxcly OOT& Ital I xaadp
DepawtOciv 7rauav v6oov xal wd. GavPaAaldav
hpawdav. VA V6(rous
&S acrTpalfhv IK TOO ObPaU&M, 19 1600 wto6vTo voG . OpIV JAV IJOU(FiaV TOO 7[aTt'IV IN&W Kai lid 84twv gal OxOpvfwv, WdOOV TfiV BOVUPIV TOO
A 6pas fX&POLI, 06 gal ObUV 66IK4q. 30xmv dv Toom P4. owoldcr* OPTV 5TI wvgopaTa T& X(jfPqTj 6p&v R Wpm 51ro T& Cmn, XafptTt tw"co tv Tolt oOpmTs
111
238
It fully after
present
study
to
investigate
in the
Christian
community
at least in
so much as. it
understanding between
reports
of the Disciples'
Missions
have
shown that this (556) out of two sources. by Luke in chapter 9, (557) q. Matthew lo: 1-14 two accounts. (558) Do '
followed probably
other
is to be seen as a conflation these two traditions From the paralleled one source represent pattern
of these
probably best to (559) And two traditions. instructions to 10: 4(560) given to the
vhen in 22: 35 Luke ref ers back to Tvelve he alludes not to 9: 11f.
but
the mission
(561)
(a)
In view it
of the
contributions that
on this
material Jesus
by ever
is pertinent
we should before
ask if Easter.
disciples
out on mission
On the
III
239
basis said
one tradition is
T. W. Manson
disciples
attested just
noted,
these
tradition.
place,
In Matthew charge)
especially,...
the whole
from the
shrinks
to the words:
'These
twelve Jesus-sent
that they with
out'
(10: 5); and Mark and Luke add only Oo) (563)
success". Beare the missionary charge produced mtst in by the
agrees the
included be end
Church.
(565)
hints
in this (i)
material
that
it
did
Church.
(Nk. 6: 7-13 and Lk. 10: 1-11; (17-20)) the most primitive one is (566) it is Luke's that that Mark felt and noticeable probably commission (56T) The wholly negative for his church. were inappropriate (568) 569) (despite 4, Lk. 10: Hoffmann of and Schulz' character stringent suggestion to the contrary) is particularly the directive appropriate not to to salute the requirements of the (as in Lk. 10: 0
im Leben:
What the
axe to proclaim
111
240
('Tl)
in
message
probable t.hat we have here a piece of pre7Easter (iii) The Palestinian milieu of the personification
(572)
"a son of peace"(573) and shaking ofFthe dust from peace (574 ) to the pre-Easter feet their origin of at also points (5T5) if this Thus the frameleast material. of some even work of the mission charge has been supplied (5T6) Church we have here clear evidence that by the Jesus early sent
disciples
out on mission
prior
to Easter
(cf.
Mk-3: 14).
question mission
that
is -
charge
to cast
out demons?
question
spirits
healing exorcism
probably
would
However, to to in
while
probably
themselves
pre-Markan
and historical
111
241
ability
to cast out to be
believed
the disciples
the Seventy (Lk. 10: 19) mentions the disciples' "power over the enemy". which, at least
support
as we, will
see, probably
a Palestinian
for thinking
origin.
This variety
is of evidence
before*E6,. tter,
to be so. disciples
We could out to
in view
sending
connection
of Satan's that
kingdom
Jesus would
assumed that
have
involved
exorcism.
I' return?
any I
accounts
of the
betrays
hand to such an extent that it appears to (5T8)' As Mark is not in the habit redactional. (5T9) details-for literary we can perhaps purposes the disciplesIreturn Even the two part in Mark's was report on vhat
the'fact'of - but
no more.
111
242
the for,
disciples
together, Ik-10:
in Jesus' insight
mission. into
1T-20-to
the history
tradition.
recognising
this
been proposed(580) nor' is it generally (581) It is the Q material that thought to be. from. L. (582) (i) Luke this tradition. The with supplies probably to v-lT is cast in Lukan language context and so we
seventy,
matter
of the (ii)
an early connection
material
as especiLlly fall
exorcism early
and the
of Satan,
a connection
which
Church did
not use.
Of particular
interest
is
lO: 18 - "I
saw Satan
fall
like
lightning
Jesus taken
a vision
is an unusual'report (584)
it is of Jesus' (585) words.
to be a reliable
to a number of different verse has been taken to refer (586) things. For example C. J. Cadoux says it is possible (587) that we have here another allusion to the Temptations . it is only possible to refer this verse back to the
But
III
2k3
Temptations
victory over
if
the
angels,
apocalyptic if
possible
detached
from the
Jesus-sayings
so relate expect
and the
Lk. 10: 18 to be in
face
of
it
this
verse
seems to defeat
which
and is completed.
verse probably
(590)
On closer
a different
investigation
story. of lightning speed.
the
with, the
tells
To begin
regards of light,
occasions
accent
is
speed but
on brightness
(Mtt. 24: 2T; 28: 3; Lk-11: 36; 1T: 24; This is especially the sti, 33ning duration and Thus mean it was
Rev. 4: 5; 8: 5; 11: 19 and 16: 18). case in Revelation and arresting speed being for that where the term of God's
interest would
lightning
III
'511 IL r-=
both
manifestly
obvious
We should verse
not make
Greek tenses
aorl'st this
participle) obvious
process.
this
IV
JESUS-THE-EXORCIST
4.1 set
So far
we
we should
to Jesus
principal light
of this
go on in the next
4.2
question
which
left
in abeyance, answer,
now we'have
is whether ! 1) an exorcist
was in fact
with healing
the
Synoptic
tradition
there
are
demoniacs
- Mk. 1: 21-28;
and 9: 14-29;
/Lk. Q, Mtt. 12: 22f. 11: 14. and the the evidence
chapter the
origin
core
of these This
presume his
an exorcist
(Mk. 3: 22-26
11: 15-18;
Mtt. 12: 28/Lk. 11: 20; Mk-3: 27 and Mtt. 12: 29/Lk. 11: 21f.; (2) Mk. 3: 28f. /Mtt. 12: 31-32/Lk. 12: 10.
IV
246
Synoptics and Acts there are also brief ); references (pars);
In the
to Jesus'
exorcisms;
Mk. 1: 32-34,39(pars.
3: llf.
Lk-7: 21; Acts 10: 38; Lk. (4: 39); 13: 32.
4.2.2
in their
incantations
for a variety
of reasons.
Josephus illustrates
an important
implication
of a 'name' of someone. Josephus begins this p. 93above) by considering cleverness, ability and musical field
in this
So probably
historical-Jesus material exorcists. practices. says-name ... perform
the
strongest
piece
is
of
that
evidence
a variety used
that
of
the
Even
evidence
Mk. 9: 38(/Lk.
9: 49)
comes to out
Jesus in
demons
Sceva -
an exorcism
incantation
We could prophets
perhaps
add
in your
in your
IV
247
shows the
Christian
using joy
Jesus' saying,
exorcisms.
The Seventy
even the
namel"
Acts "I
out a spirit Christ the Church will cast also out shows in
you in the name of Jesus most probably evidence that later, the
longer
early signs
used Jesus'
in its name
exorcisms
"And these -
accompany those
will
material
to be powerful In CC Origen
incantations Christians
power which
they
seem to
possess
by any incantations
prohibit
by Jesus'
on the in the
use of the
Inamel of'Jesus,
early
Church Jesus'
used
as an effective
means of casting
IV example, flight Arnobius evil spirits" says that (Ady. . "when heard puts name (5) Gent 1: 4-6). Jesus'
248 to
Apart there
the
use of Jesus'
in name to
is referred
a tradition preserve
such a tradition
Forty
days
led
'He is being
out for
Origen quotes
stoning
Celsus
sorcery...
,,,
(6)
secret
himself having
powers he of those
returned
4.2.4 consensus of
All
this
evidence opinion
rftuires - that
us to agree the
with
the
historical-Jesus
4.3
Another
question
that
rem ins
from other whether or not material (9) Jesus-tradition. This question 'pigs episode' in the story of the is
traditions arises
to the
(Mk. 5: 1-20,
esp-11-13).
There
37
aspect exorcism a dramatic few of the (10) Jesus. of the stories ending. exorcism story is out of character for is no other clear that with story the other
249
we only
which
perspectives
be seen to have its uniq_ue or uncharacteristic Thus Mk. 1: 21-28 probably is set within the synagogue;
is
a healing involves
and So
is unwise
by excluding It so far
is worth as it this
Church,
Synoptic
not think
and abbreviate
stories
delete
motif
of Jesus.
ferred
In the
does not
to conform relating
practical .
There is,
of the opinion
Midrash
H. Sahlin is (14)
on
IV Is. 65: 1-5. demoniac (15) As evidence Sahlin the says that as the
250 Gadarene so
heathen God.
seeking
Jesus,
seeking
Then Sahlin
mentions
swine flesh,
and
I am set
- as being between
contact
Church
between definite
contacts. (pig). In
usesXo^40S
dwell
secret
places,
of Mk. 5: 5 is that
Mk. 5: T does not have an incantationbut is modelled is so little seems then that
is surprising
is reasonable
way into
tradition.
(16)
4.4
last
chapter,
historical-critical tradition
seemed rightly
to the
Jesus.
IV
251
4.4.1
In three
of the
exorcism
stories
(Mk. 1: 21-28;
5: 1-20;
9: 14-29) there
and the
is an initial
demoniacs. but it as. it
dramatic
confrontation
residue over-
between Jesus of
tones
element
of this
confrontation
is
constern-
on the part'of
the
demoniac.
out;
himself
demon tears
and cries
out;
or torments
t
(see
5: 6) as used in the NT always has as its object something (18) (tr uly or supposedly) divine and so we would suspect that
this interpretation Nevertheless that was introduced we still into 5: 6 by the examine the demoniacs
if Mark
early I out
indulged ).
Church. possibility
and fell in
on meeting
to the
cried
has (20)
(ie. 770r7w)
ground historischen
(even
Vervielfltigung
eines
Vorgang
So, is the
it
likely
that
as an exorcist sufferers
Jesus would have had a similar who were confronted by him. that the And
on those other
hand there
are reasons
for
thinking
IV early Church probably into the stories did not need to of Jesus. introduce this
252
element (i)
Matthew,
stories does not though instance. but that (ii) stories. of this (cf
who is decidedly reticent about the exorcism (22) (23) Yet he of Jesus, prunes the Markan accounts. obliterate the consternation of the demoniacs -
in 17: 17f.
down to
77
so
use of this
7oorine7f-roy
5: 33) -
fros-0 0 -'kW;
for
example,
no desire
on the
part
o Mark to portray Luke, to this of the (4: 33,41; element. early Churchts
demons worshipping
Jesus.
8: 28;
lack -
of the it into
not
that
even seek to
rests on literary or oral dependence on an (25) form, but evidence is against precisely such
dependence.
IV
253
in concluding Evangelists is
as the of the
Church - it the
of the On the
demoniacs other
of Jesus. his
hand,
is probable
evoked a disturbance
or dimension
of the
of the with
hypothesis
to the
accusation
of being
demons did
vocalize
their
what
content
of their
words?
4.4.2
city of Jesus
In the last
being
chapter we established
Nazareth
and that
the
(Mk. 1: 24),
you'
tI
adjurel
(Mk-5: 7) formulae.
It
recognised comes from what is generally (27) What we need to note is that summary. thought that the demons addressed
the Evangelists
as 'the
But we must examine Mk. 5: T more did the demons address Jesus-
the-Exorcist
as Son of God?
Because it bearer of
a Jewish
designation it
for is
the
Jesus was addressed (28) KUmmel assumes by demon-possessed men as 'Son of God"'. (29) has a Hellenistic But can we that the title origin. extremely assume that messianic the title dimension, in Mk-5: 7 originally is. the title and had a deliberate
Hellenistic?
(ii)
Recent
NT research, clearly
Berger
(30)
31)
concludes to the
in relation
search
results
If in the
we survey
the
(33)
word
(ben/bar)
To quote
255
primarily) relationship, of
designates but is
physical
descent
a widespread. could
expression younger
subordination, pupils of
which
describe of
and members or
a group,, or it a was
a people In this
also
Testament
to God", there
Firstly
in Dan-3: 25 Thus
4: in is addressed as 'son Ex. 22f. God's People Israel as (36) Thirdly, the Davidic King% after Egyptian of Godl. (37) . 'son of God' (cf. 2 Sam-7: 12-14). models, was called
(iv)
material 'son'
we see that
some as
can be summarized was designated And Rabbi Meir One himself study it is
as foljows38)
or procla: imed 'son of God' by a heavenly is actually called In the that "Meir context these my son" by the of this divine present
to note demons
communications
heard
(God's
from behind
a curtain
...
it
IV
256
So we hear of Satan or, Agrath, the Queen
demons, saying
"Had there
teachingl"
would have harmed you " (b. Pes. 112a). Thus although actually refer in the Rabbinic to Rabbis that it material the demons do not literature ith God
as sonship
particularly
concerned
(v)
are the
following
lines
(The righteous "professes man) himself God is his his to have knowledge of the Lord
a child father.
us test
what will
son, he will
" (2-13,16b-18a)
'son of God' is
a special
connected
or; every--God.
relationship
Avi)
This
same motif
is
clear
J. A. Fitzmyer
provides
a. 4QPsDan A of
The pertinent
read -
IV
257
'[But your sog shall
ZO' Kingi shall All
serve[him.
theLureat[Goj, the
He shall
Son of God, and they shall (40) of the Most High ...,,. fragment is poorly preserved singular
As this
it
is
to (41)
person
masculine
son
Most High'
synonymous or at least
evidence
shows is
(1)
that
the
designation and
God or a being
operating
in God, to his relation of particularly (42) (3) KUm=el it that against spirits; a Jewish-messianic title.
have been
This
last
point
would it
suggest appropriate
that to
the
very
introduce
demons.
suggests
IV
258
association to the of Ps. 2: 7 and 2 Sam. 7: 14 in (44) than the exalted Jesus _ rather is, it denotes an ladoptionist'
than
a birth that
the
confession role it
of Jesus
Christians
within Jewish the
came to
of
full
widening
mission (46)
Hellenistic
Christianity"o
points late,
- that
the
was to the
- suggest(
of the
demons by the
hand it
is more than
likely the
that
the into
Church did If
not need to
introduce
appelation
the tradition.
the words of the include then along is the name, with what
demons in Mark are defensive character and origin said of the the
about
in which not
as an exorcist.
the
demons did
supernaturally
so the
demons attempted
Jesus by
IV
259
his allegiance to God. We can conclude belong that to the
probability
historical
tradition
of Mk-5: 7-
4.4.3
From the
discussions to
in the
last that
establish
demons included
(a)
"Come out
(Mk. 1: 25);
(c) "What
" (Mk. 9: 25);
emerge. to so
It
is his
this
generally exorcisms
study is
used no formulae
correct seen
wrong. or parts
We have of
and
recognized to call
contemporaries. words/incantations
not - as
it
for
century.
-is
generally enquire
judgment
have to
in the is time
plain,
Jesus was a man of his healing to which literature. technique. Jesus' (b)
Associated
paralleled charge to
49)
IV
260
in lines exorcists the that were quoted in chap. 11 difficulty 242, FF., some in see p. 31 no such of Jesus' vocal
clearly speak
demon to
exorcistic in his
were particularly
presence.
However although an element implications much stronger 'be bound' Barrett is is or of the
Jesus'
charge
to
Isilencel quiet'.
involves the
sense
'be silent/keep
in the use of the word are clearly and best. understood (see pp. 131f. Jesus' in Mk. 1: 25 as Thus in Mk. 1: 23
'be muzzled' to
above). charge
incorrect (seen.
say that
unparalleled
+? oboye).
4.4.4
the the
oF the story
that
of
historical-Jesus' parallel to
PJ76above). - the
As a story of
was quoted
son.
In this
connection
R. Herzog)(50)of
one quoted
from Philostratus'
IV Life 111: 38 (see p. gZabove). No literary story but links they are to be do both
261
in common.
4.4.5
chap. 11
In the light
there seem to
of the material
be some aspects
presented
of
in
contemporary
exorcistic
technique
that
Jesus
did
not use.
Mechanical
Devices.
exorcistts aid
techniques of
or character texts
In the
water,
example,
and fragrant
In Tobit
8: 3 burning
incense
caused the
In Jubilees
are used,
uses a finger
In another to
prickles,
IV
262
pitchq cummin, dog's of rings. hair, thread, and trumpets. the also aids
earth, Lucian
exorcists'
threatening papyri
The magical
expelling
demons. - amulets,
mentioned olives,
mastiga
plants, by the
lotus exorcist.
marjoram,
sounds produced
All
this
seems extremely
remote
from
"Be bound,
and
spirit,
him again" of the
(Ilk. 9: 25)
argued
destruction
pigs
properly
belongs
to the
authentic pigs
tradition
of the expel go
somewhere for
demons to
devices
or
cannot
be said Although
technique. of his
of his
voice
use only
in Life
parallel technique
as unique
from a Jewish
IV
263
above Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai to have cast and Rabbi
a demon out of a get out, these it two was not demons reBen
simply
impression simple
even if
unaided
do .- stand ported
out as particularly
method.
this
characteristic it
pf Jesus be a construct sought to the set Jesu6 over era? Probably means
pervaded is said
Jesus (i)
To heal
the blind
(Mk. 8: 23) and the man, born blind as part showing of his that healing
to use spittle
There
ample evidence
was part It
technique
of the
is world. used for (53) the magical papyri Rabbis against there prohibit Calvin, is nothing ancient its
And importantly,
so far
or that
Gospel rriters So
he was using
earliest Jesus
isolate
IV
264
on of hands vere clearly (57)
ministry.
the laying
Jesus' healing Abraham's healing introduce In the
a characteristic
also was a part
of
of the story of This
healing
This
example the
of Pharaoh is
an exorcism, the
Church did not of Jesus58) early of the So the Jesus is. Church
exorcism
stories
light
is hard to if it
was already
technique
the
not a construct
among the
of
be posited
authentic
traditions
about
the historical-Jesus.
If I
we note do not,
which it
healings is
and which
immediately is
tradition the
saturated
medicines, appeals to
whereby
generally
beyond
unknown exorcist
himself.
power-authority
What Jesus,,
reputed
without
to be other
is to this
that
we now turn.
(b)
No Explicit
Prayersor
Power-Authority
Invoked.
of the exorcist's
exorcisms making
which
plain,
IV
265
of the is, the exorcism exorcist rite, either by what authority invoked himself the with aid some demon.
of power-authority to effect
or aligned the
power in order
submission
of the
In
the
Ebers
Papyrus,
from
ancient
Egypt,,
the
healer
or
magician authority
begai
with
the
announcement origin
of his
source
of powertechnique
of himself
and his
exorcist
announcing of this
as the is
of a god.
practice
demonstrated
by the magical
It
has also
that
a frequent
source
of
in the
use of powerful
names.
(see p. 1oZabove).
Not only
were the of
origin
of the
exorcist's but
powers and
the names invoked (P-100) the above found This papyri, in the is the
significance, of the
essence
spells
Egyptian,
Tobit,
material.
is no evidence
of a power-
IV
266
being called, located in a higher power upon which the
in the or the
in or a name, said to
incantation,
as part
of the healing
Abraham as praying
incantations, exception
A striking of
is the
story
we quoted Eleazar
and Rabbi
with is
about Apollonius
any power-authority, of his picture their personal remains healings force - that
who neither prays: nor blA t is an effective exorcist alone the (Life IV: 20).
by
exorcists
of the
using
a conspicuous or prayers.
or recognizable
power-authority,
incantations
of Jesus
as an exorcist
Jesus does not This actual Jesus of is
(7: 29);
9: 25).
of
(1) Firstly
powerof 11: 20 Spirit/ the of Holy
practice. confesses
operate
on the the of
God, linked
power-authority--it
indeed
surprising
IV
267
for this the transmission in the exorcistic of the Jesus-material words of Jesus. did That is,
environment
as saying finger
something
of God
adjure you by God/the Spirit/ 61 ) But we do not 2. We have already historidity of the Beelzebul Charge is
established
the probable
(Mtt. 12: 24/Lk. 11: 15/Mk. 3: 22; more readily his that, source understood if
The charge
in fact 62)
as part
Jesus
intimate
he relied 'Spirit/finger
power-authority
even on the
A coordinate 'powerful
of this
point
is that
Jesus
did
not
technique.
he does not
Jews did
was seeking
to the
cannot distance
from his
contemporary
have retained
his
exorcistic of
words which
familiar
in the world
incantations
(see 4.4.3
Jesus with
did
were of a piece
his
IV
268
extent we should ask if that it was in these, incantthe early ministry it Church or Jesus of exorcism. that, the key words is own
this ational
of his
respect
to the
early
Church
did not
see Jesus'
to his as the
did
exorcisms
emulate early
them in their
by Acts
is
use quite
than say
a 'powerful sign that name' the early
as in Mk. 9: 25)
'Jesus Christ'. not
Church did
to be found
simply
he cast is
(see demon a eg. Mtt. 12: 22/ confirmed in that of Jesus though in
conclusion
further special
tradition
preserves
relation
tobther (64)
healings
exorcisms. of his
incantations is, if
about
the
subjugation
demons, that
importance
a surprising when we
This
noticeable
IV
269
exorcistic words. of him" (Mk. 1: 25).
spirit,
What is your
The demon has come out of your (Mk. 7: 29)). "Dumb and deaf spirit, I charge enter him" you,
come out
a command to the )
demon and so is
first second
has a direction, and the third directions. form save that kind of
an address,
a subjugating a binding,
question;
is no consistency
in representing
subjugating which
and the
interest
in using is
save that
an exorcism demon is
involved,
require
overpowered
and expelled.
here,,
it
has just of
been noted
exorcisms
- notably prayer
A considerable
importance
probably
to be attributed
Church.
Luke in
IV particular seems intent regardless on enhancing of the to notice the extent that practice Jesus' prayer life
270 66)
core
significant seek to
tradition part
attribute
technictue.
importance
in contemporary agreed
healings
importance
of prayer
of exorcism
--unaccompanied Jesus'
as faithfully
reflecting
healing
procedure.
outstanding
we
to be entirely power-authority,
significance as part
in his
nor used
of the healing
(c) technique
A third that
element did
of not
exorcistic
Jesus
under
the
last
such significance
that
So far
or bind
in Mk-5: 7 "I
me",
in Acts and
271
of this
it
is
indeed
that not
in f ind
of the Jesus
stories lips
the material
on the
of a form of
Church did not totally in relation tradition power for to has it Jesus'
'Of use. I, ro
an invoked
power-authority,
in Mtt. 12: 28/Lk. 11: 20 that technique did was the Spirit/finger this
not translate
across
of the
by Jesus.
in
exorcistic
formulae carry
is
part
of the
a superior apparently
power to neither
Jesus
acknowledged
convention
of Jesus'
congruous
in his incantation
is
at Mk. 9: 25.
(68)
infrequent relatively on the lips of Jesus in the (69) it is in Synoptids the words of used and not consistently Jesus to the the early demons (only is not at Mk. 9: 25). responsible for This it suggests that The of
I
Church is not
use of ipS
a feature
of contemporary
272
of some'significance
in understanding
him as an exorcist
(see pAll-below).
(d)
No Proofs.
the-Exorcist's hinged
technique
of the it
in Mk. 5. the
passage
destruction but as
reputation
either if
maintain it
or add'it
was not in so
a 'proof'
we shall technique.
of Jesus'
that
we should
sections
in declaring
using
emphatic
saying (i)
was the if
of God -
Jesus'
of exorcism,
innovative, (ii)
would
been very
conspicuous
Jesus believed
own resources,
at the
same time
IV
273
it was God who was to be seen as operative.
activity
(e)
physical
attention
to the
-a demon in
marked his
story
on leaving
demon over-
a bowl of water,
and the
(Life Apollonius story of (72) A similar a statue. stories of Jesus. The but
in Mk-5 is
the best
example,
That Mark did of Jesus consistency, the violence but this may Jesus' this is clear of could
not s,
violence
compassion
be said
violence
in all
departure activity.
of Jesus'
exorcists
devices
Jesus'
exorcisms.
IV
274
4.4.6
The "unity
Miracle
Ministry
of word and work in the divine plan of ) has been discussed on a number of salvation"(73 and the theological between these (75) This-is the necessity o*f the
not the
analyse ministry
between is
of Jesus. between is
in the
Gospels of Jesus
activities that
preaching. result
no doubt
picture
is the
activity relationship
of the is
and their
apparent
on a number of levels. and message are said in association all gospel infirmity with
On a very by the
Evangelists - for
be conducted
"And he went about and preaching disease Mk. 1: 39). Mtt-l3: actually 53ff. the
Galilee
in their
and healing
and every
people"
See also
Mk. 1: 21ff.
/Lk. 4: l6ff.. in
On another
grouped
and miracles
are associated
in rough
parallel,
And the Jesus'
sea miracle,
first part
preaching,
healings,
is
and a feeding.
so that followed
(76)
of Mark's of the
gospel kingdom
structured
proclamation
(1: 14f. ) is
and
IV
elaborated miracles by a healing. are related
275 (77)
On yet that another level the can
in order
a-particular to Jesus.
point
be made either
by or in relation is
Mtt. 8: 27/Lk. 8: 25 the miracle point it is "Who be then can made clear story that one of the
related ...
primarily ?"
is this
reasons is
miracle
the
of Jesus
on prayer.
another
level
of this
and message are so woven together fabric as in Mk. 2: lff. but /Mtt. g: lff.
/Lk. 6: 6ff.,
relationship ministry is In
in Jesus' of the
disciples
"The kingdom of God has come near to you 7f-; l0: l/Lk. q: 2).
In spite a relationship
of all
this
it
is
to
enquire is to be is a
between
'word
it
in the
primitive
Christian some
way forward
is to note
proclamation
and activity
are
IV
276
and also to notice those in the stories very where miracle structure of the
related,
(i) particular
that saying
merit
Strong
Man
(Mtt-11:
22),
judgment
10: 13-15)..
and upheld
authenticity judgment
of the saying
On the
formulation, activity
already of the
and presuppose in
Christian-preaching
Capernaum".
KRsemannsays that 'curse prophetic
(80)
the Revelation of John demonstrates Christian particular forms that of is
passage
the Christian-formulated and it recalls (81) 22f. However there is a minimal link with 22f. ('mighty works') and the 'curse pairing and blessing' of 'curse evident the failure
in Revelation (cf.
21-23.
IV
277
but the towns. mentioned post-Easter And notably are not determinative shovz no
of mission
Church Berger
there
is
in the
passage that the tradition (84) It seems best tradition. Mtt. 11 : 21-23/Lk. '10: 13-15
to is
the tradition
behind
Mussner
goes so then.
say that,
logion, of his
is the lament
of Jesus
these
native
Galileel,,
(85)
These four
sayings
that
Mtt. 12: 28/Lk. 11: 20 Jesus makes a direct-connection qxorcisms and the of his proclaimed coming of the kingdom (cf. message gives the
between his
of God - the essence (86) Mk. 1: 14f. ). Nk. 3: 2T/ exorcisms, of Jesus a wider
Mtt. 12: 29/Lk. 11: 21f. significance viz. the very than
the. mere casting out of unclean spiritsq I downfall or destruction of Satan and his kingdom; that the establishment downfall of the of the the
(pplisfFabove) have and we seen kingdom kingdom mighty that brings of God is of Satan. miracles men should with repent directly
related
to the
10: 13-15
links
together
eschatological
IV
278
(ii)
with Lk-5:
Two miracle
stories
in particular
(1) Mk. 2: lff. friends.
are interwoven
(/Mtt. 9: lff. the
four
Here
(Mk. 2: 5ff.
) and miracle
(Mk. 2: 1-4) 6
traditions.
Church saw an indivisible and what he was saying. ), the man with of a block thinks that a withered conflict
of three the
stories
origin
of the
controversies than
debates 4Urmann
be put (89)
hand, face
early
conflict of Jesus
withtheTcws
about
Sabbath
healings.
The saying
in v. 4 is the centre
not decisive for the
of the story.
early it Church's is probably
As it
abandonment an authentic
seventh
day observance
And as the saying presupposes a specific act (92) take both the saying and one described we will setting as authentic.
present
tell
us about
Jesus'
link
between
In short, and teaching/preaching? aP and the teaching are/a piece in Jesus' radical Halakcth on the Sabbath which
the Rabbinic
prevented
people
IV from fulfilling God's commandment conclude is that to to the love (cf. Mk. 2: 2T')") relationship ministry of
279
integral to
and action'
be traced
the
historical-Jesus.
(b).
We have,
in
the
last
few paragraphs,
been
able
to
trace
the origin
of a relationship
and
message back to the historical-Jesus. that nature with often one does exist,
established on the
support 95) of
this
opinions!
Ridderbos power
Jesus'
as proofs
Jesus'
Fridrichsen miracles
gives
pride-of
place
to Jesus'
accompanying
and confirming
Bultmann here,
exorcisms, There is
sees
dawn-
as signs no doubt of
this Church
was held
by at
some sectors
the. early
represented
in the NT,
being
John's
as authenticating
IV ff
280 ... even though the works, is you do not believe that me,
believe
in me and I am in the
twice
mission.
sayings is
the judgment
saying
ship between miracle said ance. miracles this Jesus' is that'the This could
miracles
be construed his
Jesus
as authenticating
we should refusal
Mk. 8: 11(/Mtt.
16: 1-4)
Q (Mtt. 12: 39/Lk. 11: 29) - and see the Gospel of Thomas 91. \1
This is strong evidence against the view that Jesus used his
miracles
to authenticate
his
mission
(cf.
In the reply
miracles of and the
(,Mtt-11:
they In 2lf. the are
a whole
- events
the
parable
Strong do not
l2: 29/Lk. of
) the
message
downfall
IV of Satan,
fall. Jesus the
themselves
Spirit /f inger
constitute
saying themselves
that
(Mtt. are extend,
very
down-
the They
kingdom.
confirm
Jesus' of In
preaching. itself in in is
of
Jesus short,
taking
actualized of Jesus
themselves (102)
the
exorcisms
the
*6f*God
operation.
as I can see it
is this
conclusion
exorcisms his
more than
anything
else which
background
and environment.
Even if
of Jesus'
technique it
echo in other
material,
'healing' take up
but vere the coming of the kingdom of God. this point*in chap. VI when we discuss to his exorcisms.
Jesus'
self-under-
standing
in-relation
4.5
Conclusions.
chapter
has in a
of the
Jesus in
enviro=ent,
to draw a picture
of him as an exorcist.
4.5.1
which
Our study
view
so far
Jesus,
the milieu
century would
against
have
we should
IV viewed him is
have that Jewish us believe. the background
than-some
error
scholars
of Fiebig
hitherto
that of
would
he thought were to the have
miracle It
stories
Jesus of Hull
miracle
stories.
was the
error
attempted
an almost
stories
background.
continue
to
explore
this Judaism
to place
in the next
clearly
to demarcate
against which
and Hellenism
as alternative
backgrounds
Jesus-the-Exorcist the evidence. the two cultures admit material and depict
and to understand
him,
is to misrepresent between
the boundary
clear,
cultural-streams
in order
the historical-Jesus-the-Exorcist.
4.5.2
the
From this
chapter
we are left
in no doubt that
and extrahe was an in the is healing incantations around of him. his no doubt twentieth an over-
biblical
extraordinarily that
successful his
century
Jesus
even misrepresentation, He was an exorcist have been Jesus readily who used recognized a herd
Jesus' or
words
by those of pigs
even used
as part
IV
283
In his
treatment
of
Stories" that
stories.
(106)
Bultmann
bears
a resemblance
to elements
was attempting
in the Synoptic
to show -
What Bultmann
these
'parallels'
early
Christian
oral folk
(10T) stories
may for
and miracle
some reduce century contortion categorically important is that
While
a situation first
Iculture-shock' this
needs
to
be stated case.
an unproven has
failed to
he produces have
folk
tradition of it
demons is
than
the
formation Bultmann
the is
against suppose
just
that
folk the
traditions early
way from
Christian
other
traditions.
This has been one of the results) (108) We have shown also that work. material motifs was dependent (see pp. Wabove). upon the And
tradition
284 with
In
motifs
which
are familiar
chapter
to
our of tradition
us through study
this the
last of
militates of
an accretion Synoptic
the
home with,
and truly
original
tradition.
4.5.4
very ordinary
was a-
and threat-
there
were familiar
incantational-exchanges
Jesus and the demons, and we know of one occasion healed a demaniac. from a distance. of Jesus' exorcisms
were aspects
characteristic
most exorcisms
Jesus neither
of
of the healed
demoniacs the
(Mk. 5: 15);
an exorcism,
but also
were none
than his
own person
IV
285
(a) hazardous
Jesus' beyond
And, to
although
in
historical as unique
a dimension demented
investigation it
of
it that
is
claim
his
something
exorcisms
appears
giving the
mere
healing_of
individuals
that.
Jesus
first
one to with
link
the
exorcism
success was in
action
was the
coming
eschatological
(b)
(109)
historicalgo on and
may be then
we should to him,
discover
dimension of the
twentieth
may find
understand
interpret and
Jesus-the-Exorcist
V AS OTHERSSAWHIM
to explore
century is,
responded
Exorcist. purpose
Although of t he last
two chapters
at recovering
our principal picture available writings to realize Church, may also Jesus' NT there exorcist responses plain inquiry categorize tesponded that
objective
in turn, contribute to to by helpinfill out our tentative For us, response the most readily
Church.
interpretations
to recover
responses Apart
exorcisms is other
from the
acknowledges in salvaging It is
exorcistic place
ministry.
in the first
5.1' gospel
In order
to do
this to Jesus'
we shall exorcisms
(a)
analyse
the
material
relating
to see what it
V can tell (b) with cally first us about his the aid audience's biblical response material, to him,
287
and then critiin the
of extra
we will
as to how people
or categorized
Jesus-the-
Exorcist.
, 5.191
If
material
relating are
to
of response exorcisms
is often
said
Jesus'
moved
to fear
( and amazement
Mk. 5: 14/Mtt. 8: 33/Lk. 8: 34; Mtt. 12: 23/Lk. 11: 14). occasions exorcisms possessed said that the tradition some bystanders (Mk. 3: 21,30; it proposes declared that as a result
of Jesus'
was by Beelzebul
(Mk. 3: 22/Mtt.
conclude that
(Mtt.
12: 23).
Our task
now is
of the gospel
records
at
these points.
5.1.2
exorcisms.
to Jesus#
to be a stereotyped
closing dealing
motif with
stories. III
When we were
we were able to cast ("). but we were assumption, of this element in the
288
A way forward there in approaching this problem is to ask if that might
in Jesus'
exorcisms
have created
(a) - Taylor
amazed"
Da#,,, Aat is remarkable since the Jews (2) But Taylor goes with exorcism. astonishment spirit (3) is with due to the fact a word, without that the
that. "the
chapter,
in his
(Taylor's
was a mere word may come from Mtt. 8: 8/Lk. 7: 7 asks-Jesus to 'say a word' . and his boy
(b)
IV,
that
Jesus'
lack
of
exorcisms
was not
a fea-
although Jesus, it
by 'words
extra-ordinary
may have been the cause. of some amazement in those who his of his exorcisms. healing The same could technique. also be said on the
witnessed brevity
(c)
caused
belongs
289
exorcism should
story produce
it
is not
surprising
that
this of
such a response.
The mention
at this
point,
may, however,
redactional.
In conclusion, healing
it
seems that
while
nothing
in Jesus' to
cause fear
of
probably
goes back to
the earliest
of the historical-Jesus.
5.1.3
I ITV3 c'(4--roCsay that Jesus was beside oL (4) (id'rrj pt ). Whether were the oc Troer *&-ro& , (5) That this need not detain us. of Jesus or family
Sitz
im Leben is quite
probable
a charge that the Church would introduce (6) In fact Matthew (12: 22; cf. 46ff. the tradition. 8: 19ff. ) suppress the incident (see of the account the to
(11: 14; cf. Luke and p.. Z/ z above). charge is independent further
in the historicity
tradition
being
290
this
charge Jesus'
with
activity
no exorcism as we shall
with
Mark.
The Beelzebul
controversy
is
However we can-
In the first
a Markan hand
- so severe
be demon-possession to thought equivalent that was entic - and (8) (and brought 30) 3: 21,22 .. being were we can see why to mad together report. if even they were not originally part of the same
here,
Jesus-the-Exorcist observers)
be we cannot mad.
as an exorcist
V
5.1.4 to conclude brought response into Did the exorcisms that of Jesus lead his This observers is
291
question
focus
specifies
to Jesus' (9)
When we examined the Beelzebul III we concluded that the acclamation redactional that
controversy
in chap,.
activity. Jesus'
to conclude
exorcisms
the crowd,
evince there
his for
an earlier
work of a number of scholars hopes of the time involved (10) would cast out demons. 'did
remains
to the conclusion
reply It is
to this
question that
could be based on there was a hope which (11) evil spirits. 12: 11f.; Test,
suggested
The evidence
Levi
Reuben 6:
Siphre-
1 Enoch 10: 4.
of Solomon's
V
-_ expertise in _ combatinIf demons (see p. joz above), it
292
might
be thought
title for
that
the
'Son of David'
Coming One in this
is
a particularly
context. To this
appropriate
we can add
that
the title
'Son of David'
traditions
history the uncertain to the of this title prior (13) Christian there is some evidence that it was in use era (14) among the Rabbis in the late first century.
evidence? with
Firstly,
the use
exorcism.
in a Messianic with
or dealing
demons.
"raise 17: has Ps. 23 Sol. the example the Son of David... expressed
raise
11(16 0)
up unto them their king, (17) Here (vv. 23-46) there is (18) that
off it
God will
alien Ie o f/ eathen is made (19).
up a king
throw
Jerusalem
no mention
Rabbinic
material
does not
link
exorcism at this
or dealing
with
Satan and the demons. side we see that battle with evil
that the Messiah would do the expectation (20) does not involve the term/title spirits The title
Test.
'Son of David'.
control of
is used in conjunction
Sol., e. g. par. 5.
with
However,
the
this
demons in
is,
above)
if
not
a wholly
Christian
V
document at least that it cannot so thoroughly reworked by a Christian of the
293
hand
be used to establish
the nature
Messianic
hope in relation
to the use of
'Son of David'.
in Jewish
literature
designation.
cannot be seen as a peculiarly (21) But the association of the title does seem to be a Christian by using the one available of healing Messi- and
short
connected
observers acclamation
Secondly cited
we should that
examine
which would is
was
as evidence
deal with
demons.
to be noted of the
the evidence
In using origins
material
of the
of Christian
-some care must be exercised that the Testaments (23) of There is have at present which
undergone
interpolations. over
a considerable
debate
the origins
the Testaments
v
was inaugurated debate primarily us only by de Jonge's in so far (24) work. alerts This
294
need detain
as it
us to the
of examining cited
each of
have a Christian
Test.
Levi
of chapter probably
18, which
has
24 is
Verses
describe
Jesus'
"The heavens
shall
voice
And the
of understanding and sanctification (; z6) .,. in him the upon water "And his star Verse shall arise
Mtt. 2: 2.
children
to tread
Mtt. 12: 29/Lk. 11: 21, where Jesus binds v. 12a could Beliar is well
a relatively
Satan,
pre-Christian difficult to
On balance being
I think
see v. 12 as certainly
pre-Christian.
V
Test. (vv. 3-5) text Lord's Jud. that 25: 3. This verse is part
295
of a section (29) One problems. for the
has considerable
textual
(A) does not have v. 4b ("And sake shall be made rich") But in view
omissions it cannot
is nottlearly text.
Christian, (30)
Christianized help
each text
apparent
In v. 3 the reference of
to a 'spirit
reminiscent of
the destruction
the fire
confidence in v. 3.
notions
Most of with
the the
texts last
only
first
verse
two lines
and that
of man may come from a Christian That reference of probable pre-Christian to the defeat material
of Beliar reduces
is
Christian origin.
our confidence
Test. _bute
Dan
5: 10f..
probably
attri-
to a Christian
296 "for after the usual arise land for you and the salvation tribes of
writer
from the
follows
'. dealing
immediately.:
This is with the the
land he will
beginning Messiah". of (34)
exclude
Test.
Reub. with
6: 10-12
from-the.
evidence
reference
to dealing
6: 5-12 looks like a later In any case the section (35) in v. 12 to an eternal and the awkward reference in wars visible (36) Thus in and invisible little quite likely refers can be of the
dying
to Jesus. placed
conclusion,
confidence
messianic
aside In
the light of
be confidently
the pre-
place
we have to consider
of Siph: re Lev.
messianic
entailing
demons.
However
297 as evidence of
the nature
of the pre-Christian
than the middle of the second can come from no earlier (39) and the PR is-dated between the fourth and century AD (40) ninth centuries.
then with
only
the Ass.
usefulness as they
audience his
attempted For in
to assess
exorcisms.
the Ass. is
Mos. 10: 1 the hope - "And not is tp the work of any what will (42) (10: 1). One') but
simply
appear Cthe
Heavenly
he is not
to the
God himself
" hero who seems to precede but his task is not part
the appearance
of either
task as
to good works,
(perhaps
(9: 7; 10: 1)). Kingdom the to the coming of as we can see the author of the Ass. figure Mos. would who would
a Messianic
298
Fifthly told to "Bind ". we can consider Azazel 1 Enoch 10: 4 where Raphael and cast him into is is
the -
darkness... ekorcism
Here thbugh
involved
is not.
Thus as Russell
'Messiah' (44)
was not
we should that
of seems
difficult
connecting
day with
possible
audience that, is
I am concluding there is
of Jesus,... of
exorcisms
were a be
the proximity
disagreed those to who even comprehensible (4 6) assumptionif - , in so far as. such an explanation of the signi-
correct
ficance
But we
4
299
the relationship
and eschatology.
In view
of
these
responses
to Jesus, which
of the historical-Jesus-the-Exorcist in the previous the bystanders Jesus? chapter, the question
arises,
would ized
or observers. for
have assessed
exarple,
magician Charismatic
(Morton
or a Necromancer Can it
(Vermes)
or what? at All?
even be said
5.2.1 that
We begin
with
one of
suggestions, Morton
a magician.
is Professor
Smith's
"'Jesus
Magician'
was
the
figure
seen
by most
ancient "destroyed
opponents
of Jesus" after
(and that
this
picture
was) of
Christians
got control
about
Smith's
that
he not
to be correct,
so that Jesus
cons-idered
in
to be a magician,
terms of the first
actually
was a magician
century
understanding
of
that
category,
V As we will
ordinarily the
300
discover
lengthy
Smith's
reply that
as Smith's
cuts
so directly
his
theory in
Morton
Smith
first
about
Jesus
the gospels.
Then he looks
the picture
are assessed th Pto see how evidence accords far - that Jesus was
a magician.
(a)
As the
later
Christian,
Jewish,
reference there
And we shall
by taking case.
to Smith's
Two of the early the Outsiders the Magician generally and that as Jesus.
given
by Jewish
tradition
to Jesus' is
father .,,
to be identified
(The key passage, at one. time censored from (52) Smith gives no evidence as the Talmud is b. San. 67a). to why any of these names should be identified as denoting
301
Jesus and his this particular family. point However R. Travers a precursor of Smith, Herfordt' rests (53) an his case II:
for-the
from Tosephta
Hullin
that-in to doubt
light
impossible (54)
Nazareth". * argument
against
slim is not
is
firstly
uncommon in the Talmud, a century identifying Jesus rightly and his denying after Jesus.
H. Derenbourg Jesus,
during
Smith
is
could
by means of
form of
f le sh?"
"tattooing that this says (58) Then a bit later Jesus". Smith "Moreover, 'the that Paul claimed almost Smith certainly refers to
to be tattooed
V For evidence Galatians he relies on Hans Lietzmann's let (60) note on me; for in turn
302
6: 17: - ("Henceforth
I is
bear on-my body the marks of Jesus"). dependant Papyrus The spell upon Deissmann's the Leiden use of
the Demotic
J. 383 of reads: -
Museum in relation
me not,
thou
therel
-I
am PAPIPETOU METUBANES; it to
of Osiris to its
and to place
anyone trouble
Deissmann
the impression
at once becomes more intelligible: k,-riovs m4w'Yrtr of for me, for I possess
is no evidence
no evidence
would the
he was tattooed
after
fashion
of a magician.
(ii)
In his
effort
a magician Firstly
Smith he quotes
and Tacitus
aid.
a kind
a new superstition
V involves (which the practice) Smith here (64) of magic". On the use of maleficus we shall
303
translates It is
as magic),
have more
sufficient
to note
in anticipation
translation
is by no means certain.
Secondly
Professor
(Annals Tacitus
by Nero.
of arson last
"hatred
phrase
Smith
says that
to magic"
(p. 51).
This
to so seeing
tends
an application group,
to the Christians,
a Jewish is
general,
comment on the Jews they to pity scrupulously and help (p. 51) of
they hold
as enemies"' hatred
he does not of
as grounds
extersays
This,
indicates
notion
Christians
were doing
fails is not
Firstly against
in the
the
V
Christians - he is attempting to give reasons
304
why Nero should W. H. C. Frend odium could fails have. that as
And further
charge of
does not seem... that (65) Secondly Smith the human race' (66) persecution. assume that the Christians is
to note
'hatred
used in antiquity is
for, Jewish
There
"hatred
of
a charge
as popular but it
them"
clear,
to equate he
'hatred
cannibalism,.
which
in antiquity
to be associated
and witches.
no evidence 'hatred
we should
the phrase
than Frend's
to do personal to one's
back on obligations
men, and it
was regarded
as a characteristic
Jewish fault".
(67)
Pliny the witnesses (68) The section of to Trajan. here is Pliny hearing of
is
the
of particular
interest
305
Christian "that before apostates it habit on a fixed by turns day to assemble ) (carmen, hym, a l,.,!,
0
and sing
as a god". word here the possible answer to sing is is of cours4carmen. Sherwin-ldhite and he says: is ordinary It for mean an of is (69)
interpretations that
carmen dicere
a song or to intone
formula
example, invocation
might
in as a magical
of quasi
the original
Sherwin-White's no evidence
(p. 180)
as he offers it
is but
referring
or spells,
With
the Dialogue
With is
Trypho at last
by Justin clearl
to a charge
of magic his is
argument indefensible
around for
'magician'.
This'is
clear
in Dialo "For -
distinguishes
between
the terms
they dared
V call him a magician and'a deceiver (71) reference is. noting . that the to this Jewish of the people".
to a footnote, passage.
Justin
of Jesus
points
reputation to refute
JuStin
at pains
the chargeas
(v)
Smith
is
also
correct
in seeing
of an otherwise by Eusebius.
reads
the works
of our Saviour
were always
present,
for
from the dead, who not merely risen, Saviour but were constantly was living, but
not
while ("Irl
some time
XPovov
) after cKotyOv vived p. 55). But I think see here against that even till
so that
(ILE 4: 3: 2, cf.
Smith's-'contrast' of a charge
Here the same two comments that apply - the charge Christianity, of magic
is being
made is
of orthodox
refuted,
t
307
(vi) is The next major witness (df, 38), did for 68). Professor Smith's case
the evi-
Celsus
consider Smith
(p)*)I*x('ce, of these
rightly
passages magic.
- that
Celaus
gives
"may be correct" us
he wants
the Gospels of
Smith which
the moment,
notion
a magician no evidence.
of him,
though
princip&t Firstly
a number of
things impres-
the misleading
he has reviewed
evidence least
the outsiders' of
image of Jesus.
one snippet
references a magician.
to Jesus being
Suetonius
of Chrestus
V.
'Chrestus' being a popula'r mis-spelling but of
3o8
the name 'Christ'(7Z) seems to (73) was a magician. at many evidence Jesus was that he is the
- is by no means compl; mentary, have no wish Secondly points. he cites, a magician. dealing views with held to give idea any that
Suetonius
Chrestus
Smith's
contemporaries.
show that
of the contemfor
who said
a magician
But as has already forcefully and without was correct. is no alternative (meagre) shall evidence rebutted. other
untenable
To determine but
of the charge
to return
to the NT to see if
do later.
(b) thought
attempted a magician
Jesus'
'contemporaries'
the Outsiders
Meant") thought
to spell
the difficulty
of, this
defining
magic not
in a twentieth
309
century
that,
but in a first
treatment picture of is
context,
although
he gives
the various
notions
to relate
evidence
chapter.
choices more)
we do not
which
these
might
opponents.
(c)
and see
he first the
society,
In dealing SaidN
sectors (pp.
with
of 21ff.
century
example, (pp.
)"Family (pp,
opinions example,
charge
be a Samaritan,
he had
Smith
contends
that
- means that the accusers thought that (76) His reason for arguing this is to mean that he was of a demon
possessed,
he had control
310
and could make it do miracles" that (p. 77). Smith (pp, 31f. ) is
Yta doest in some cases, mean to have il', correct (77) it is doubtful-if But this control. something under (78) in the NT. Hanse has pointed out that meaning is intended in noting in Greek philosophy two meanings namely that it, if of 'to and religion have', there is, in the use of these distinction;
linguistic is
to. evil
spirits
passive
possession
of him.
in oneself"',
of this,
that'Jesus
per-
(1)
although
"the
is still Beelzebul no more than the chief extended... (81) (2) (3: 23), by The Jesus, Mark demons". reply given of of "How can Satan using cast out Satan? " implies not that but Jesus is
or manipulating in
the possessing
power,
section
following
had said
here
I does not in I
in one's
power' spirit.
be controlled'
case by an evil
V Nevertheless
feel that Jesus'
(82)
contemporaries here
charged
demon,
least)
agree here
(1) Matthew
The point
at which
to begin
is by noting
how
their
tradition
It
would (at
the end of
a pericope),
above) that
3: 30 was not in
Mark and though
Mark's Q, (83)
conflating
up Mark's
to his Q tradition,
final sig-
a littld
Neither
up'Mark's
3: 22, effectively
of Mark where the accusers demon, to the Beelzebul. (84) sense that
Beelzebul
Such a notion
unacceptable
to Matthew
312
(:Z) In John's different in-the authority Gospel v OV(O is used in an entirely is used
way from the Synoptics. context for of a debate his miracles; over that
of powerappear to
miracles
as being
authorized
and enabled
by Beelzebul. is used
in Matthew
(11: 18 and Luke (7; 33) the term against Gospel the activity
directed
of John the to
there
has been no attempt (7: demon 201 8: 48ff.; a the context relation of Jesus'
the accusation it
Jesus-had
to the words of
Jesus.
'Are
we not
right
in
and have a demon? "' has two elements; se.condly that first
10: 20)). is
he has a demon,
a single
"I -
Consequently
synonymous
an understanding
is
immediately
to see the
followed
latter
by
phrase
no reason
V
as more, than are little are four supplementing the first (87) so that Besides
313
the two phrases this verse there
synonyms.
occurrences
in the NT. In each of awlLv5mcq ,, a disbelieved characterizes messenger'of in Acts 12: 15 Rhoda is disbelieved Peter is stan-
Firstly
(14"t,vT7) when she relates ding Felix that at the door. says that Secondly Paul
to Paul's
defence
is mad (Mvi'v?
to which is
he is not mad (06 &we -rc) but ., (Acts 26: 24f. ). Then thirdly truth" that when outsiders will strictly they hear not an assembled
"speaking
tongues is not
say they
This by
inspired
Finally
a response
a response
or activities
to his
references
to words
own status
relationship
to be synonymous we can
them an unbelievable
The phrase
in 8: 48 is
the
situation
is
similar
to that
in 10: 20.
314
SwpOVtov1"Xic
To confirm
assuming that
meaning element with this for of
could well
this
have a similar
the first agrees
John.
we see that
("You
noting between
of contact theology
"As to John 8: 48 there picture was not these faith, religious historical not of Jesus which as the scribes Rabbinic instead would
would
to Jews that if
His fulfilment If
foundation
speeches
in John 8 it him as a
Bowman is well
aware that the Jews would not have meant their (91) if but it literally Jesus were acting as accusation was (92) forth the Samaritan by putting such unbelievable opinions.
Smith
is mistaken of
in .
as an accusation
Matthew idea
to excise tradition
of Jesus
Beelzebul' is not
he is possessed
to have originally
been anything
315 a charge
of magic criticism.
might
the judgement
(ii) Jesus
Vital
to
program
of
trying
toshow, of -frAvo, (
that as a
was a migician
interpretation
(93) magician'
by Fr. that But in in J. Samain
of
Smith's
says "has
case is
an article
argued (95) P vaS
Smith
the fact
gospels what
Samain
outside determine
NT -1 the
and that
one has
from
only
after
this
the-translation
Samain that
mind prior
the evidence.
meaning is
'deceit' to its
was 'lead astray'. (98) and rare _ with a 99) aspect. negative into up for the LXX. trans-
was taken
used generally
of the revealed
instigation
to idolatry".
V
"transgression forces like is brought but about, not by ungodly
316
metaphysical
the devil,
the word group is used in the rejection of (101) This glance at the pre-NT use of the illustrates that there with is neither magic, nor a is it
the word in
connection
a magician.
We can now turn the term was either (102) magic evidence categories. or that it
and Samain who suppose that to a direct accusation (103) means magician. into three which of The broad uses the in defence
produced Firstly
is
that
evidence
Christian is
apologetics
and secondly
condemnation
the related
Thirdly
Jesus.
SmIth
the debate
about
It
is
the
lasiL
category
of its
the-use
of
is most useful
in discovering
relationship
as yo
little 7r4VOS pretenders Josephus parallel
But at this
He relies here
point
Josephus
messianic What in
of 17%XO(voc
is
to use it as a
imposter)
317
(106) synonym. This is of little about help these to Samain as people is that would
nothing
There
in Josephud'no or
'charlatanthan
As we have transferred
noted in
above the
the
7rANvc'4j time is
word used
group-in primarily
the in
sense
pre-NT
relation It is not,
to erring so far
teaching
or correct
doctrine.
as it with
in relation
miracles.
When we examine
nikc; vv it
to Jesus
deceived
the Christian
message.
to this will
prophets
signs is
astray...
that
but
the
astray then
and wonders. )
propose did
the Evangelists
V
aspersions his miracles were being-cast but that Jesus' on the way that accusers astray. felt
318
Jesus performed that in general
the people
It
centuries in such
is
only
the second*and*folloi4ing
with that the those the of miracles attacking of of Jesus and the
Proof
Eusebius,
he has
been
with
those
accept in it,
completely
such things
or hold
(yoj: r1P<4
as
spectators,
(7rXckvo( ) often do"" (Bk. III (107) Eusebius sets' the accusation the character the ditinct were, and teaching impression in using
chap. of
was arguing
VlXovos
referring ,
Jesus' miracles.
to conclude with
that
by
'magician'
neither
contemporaries
to designate
319
(iii)
k4ef<01 V01^0 accusation xgxx; v
Yet another
item
on-Smith'A-Agenda
_ with
is, tc)'eqtiate
so that man were the not
we would
not
over")'becomes
This
with
relatively
quickly.
Tertullian
in citing
for
Awxo7io',aps .
evidence
to
'magician'
and Jerome
no evidence
in a context or
'sorcerer',
connotations
(Smith's might
witness) of
take
consult
. (haruspex),
magicians
because
320
the magnitude thing But, against of their crimes, '(Codex quite is shall not attempt any-
Justinianus
readily not
be argued
used, to describe
activity.
However even if
still no evidence , to
Smith's
show that (116)
evidence
in using
'is
granted,
there
for -
is
maleficus (117)
kwko7loco'S
Tertullian
and Cyprian
understood
a reference
to
'magician'
or
case where I have seen maleficus translation than 'evil doer'. That
is is
Roman law
elsewhere
and determining
point
in
the
first doer',
instance
that is
a general
'evil
save where it
to take
on a specific
meaning.
instance
by early they finally,
we conclude that
Christian the writers lader
for
Koxart175
thought
term equalled in
the Jews'
charge
the Gospels
of Jesus being
7
321
as a charge
of magic.
As there
charges
of magic
we should of*Ouadratus.
mentions
Quadratus
Hadrian.
the Saviour's
S
works were always that healed Jesus' charge do with is, those (or
were not
raised
remained departure.
during
ministry of magic
omotering
'incantations'
performing
or appearance
of being
miracles
of Justin_Martyr. quotes he
In chap.
69 of the
Justin
fulfils "healed
prophecy;
they
was magical
For they
to call
counterfeit
by the devil,
V
this which that Justin sets the reality, to be magical Justin of the miracles (0mv-rar&V is clearly
322
of Christ, ) and thinking their of
in turn
connection Christ
against
as having than
to do with the*meAns
authenthey
or materiality
rather
by which
were performed.
(3) just
Celsus.
The charge
of Celsus
is
that
sorcerers
says Celsus.
the activity
"displaying
dishes and cakes things not-really (I: 66f. ). Celsus people, has in mind the as well is
only
as such in
the imagination"
stories
of
feeding Again
many
miracles place.
appeared along
to take lines
And indeed
the charge
these
by trying Origen's
In essence
character
fabricate
his lives?
and by these
fabriactions
men to holy
Summaryl. his
In our response
to
v (1)
Suetonius dense;
of magic
is
clear
(Justin
Martyr,
only
failed
but he misunderstands accusations. Jesus did particular Arnobius miracles portarit who if (etc. tance results ), not That relate
the notions is,, the substance to him having (this charge 1: 43). 'magic' the
involved
methods Adversus
Gentes of
Firstly,
life-style
of the
individual.
liar worker, was a cheat, or murderer (122) impor Secondly, was a magician; of singular and longevity aBove). That is, of the if his 'magician's' work proved
to be a fraud
(3) Jesus
to show-that
charges
laid
against
to a charge
of magic. critics of
shown is
contemporary
to any realm
- by Satan himself.
324
As the-second are quite-different cannot see it and third from that century reflected charges in against Jesus I
the Synoptics
any value
in understanding
how Jesus'
to think (123)
contemporaries
considered
him to be a magician.
"Was Jesus accused of Necromancy? " asks (124) C. Hi Kraeling. And his answer is 'Yes'. Kraeling's 5.2.2 case centres Herod's raisedol, heard view around his understanding "Johng is of Hk. 6: 14-16(pars. has been Herod has mighty is the It of works. )
of Jesus,,
(briefly)
a report
between
and John?
be that
the ministries
7: l8-23). (125)
' So Kraeling The backsayings 10: 20) and the the locution
suggests
necromancy.
that-apart
from the
to Jesus
8: 482 49,52;
66(5#Vfoy 'S, Lv
and to make him do one's impression occasions. And Kraeling that In this fact it
have a demon under one's control (126) bidding". Kraeling gives the is used on a number of other only for in Mtt. 11: 18/Lk. 7: 33, thinking'that this verse
phrase
appears
gives-us
no evidence
V was intended under his charge in to convey the notion also having John of mentions a demon
325
Kraeling
the Beelzebul
(Mk. 3: 22). of
This case.
undermines
destroys
Would Jesus'
audience
In Jesus represented
the Jew Geza Vermes considers in the Gospels abilities derived, contact not with 127)
"as a man whose supernatural from secret God, (which) This conclusion in powers, proves
character
But
of our understanding
as to say -
of a charismatic.
can we go so far
"that
the person
of Jesus
is
to be seen as part
of the
charismatic
Judaism
Hasidim
words,
(129)
He places
Jesus
through
an examination
of Jesus
particularly
to exorcism,
V
the material Jesus is Vermes produces Jubilees, to set up the background for
326
Josephus,
Rabbinic
Vermes,
to Jesus that
we are able
a corrective
position. three
chapters, milieu.
indeed also
at one with
Jewish
say 'corrective'
because we have produced evidence that have Jesus I audience may not/classed him simply as one
rabbis.
There were-probably
the Abraham of the Genesis in the PGM, the sons as rabbis of like Honi
the exorcists
the Strange Exorcist, (131) This and Hmina benDosa. Jesus' audience
variety
traditions
was probably
methods with
SeIcondly, Palestine
although
of all
in
first there
century are
the rabbis
some important
327
(a) technique 73 above), Although on occasions we see the rabbis using no
save the command to the demon to get out Jesus is almost (cf. Mk. 5: 10ff.
(see p.
) consistently
simple this
in his
exorcistic Jesus
technique,
exorcists
"no rite
ments. methods, city
is mentioned in connection
In fact, his compared with
with
itself".
(b)
In the last
chapter
we spent
some time
the relationship
was that
to be traced
the Ijasidim
connection
between
and a message.
Closely that in
related
to this
point
is
the last
particular)
to be the Kingdom of God preoccupation significance with is not with he the some-
in action.
is Jesus' but
general this
is so also. This
exorcisms.
relationship charismatics.
328
(d) probably early We noted important (pp-Z670 above for that although and prayer prayer was the part
was never
of Jesus'
of exorcism. healing
(eg. a (see
without
prayer,
However this
If
our argument
is
correct
Vermes'
view needs at
least
some correction.
Nazareth and his
Although
disciples
the nearest
are the
parallel
to Jesus of
pupils Jewish
rabbis
and although
Jesus-the-Exorcist
environment
against would I hasid?
that
over
So
healing/exorcistic viewed
audience did
they
is. it
probable
that,
as an exorcist,
characteristics
in
of
this
chapter,
examined Jesus'
ways in which
contemporaries
Jesus'
ministry exorcist
basid, have be him to a as caused seen may it is doubtful if those who witnessed of
him at work In
him just,
another
their'rabbis.
V the conclusions
tions in this
329
to this
connection.
chapter we will
5.3 look at
the last of
section
of
this
chapter
we will
the early in
Church
represented
the gospels.
Q, Matthew,
Luke.
to be
the Gospels
be earlier
Mark first
most about
Jesus- the-Exorcis
So, what
is Mark's
interest (a)
in,
miracle
background Satan.
in relation in part
mission
by a conflict mission, is
view, (134)
of Jesus' of exorcism
linked
with
the ministry
the preaching
of the Kingdom of
V
God, For Mark there his were two complementary and his parts
330
to Jesus' (especially went beyond This first for
teaching/preaching
healing
something
exorcism Mark.
indeed,
as was argued,
programmatic
(b) of Mark's
there
are also
In 1: 32-34 Then at
Mark emphasises
the exorcisms
"he would
the demons to
they knew'him".
As we will
Matthew
(12: 23),
Mark highlights
the messianic
of the exorcisms,
another
(136) reflected
Jesus'
that
it
probable
Jesus-the-Exorcist to
'son as
themselves. (adding
data it
to v: ceoS - contrast
to use as part is
Christological
programme,
the-Exorcist by his
the Son of God, and is the demons of for the historicity Satan
even worshipped
enemies,
the preservation
V material implicit may be due to Mark's in the exchanges interest in'the and Christology the demons,
331
between
Jesus
Vefse not
12 says that
Jesus Wred6ls
strictly theory
Secret' look
discredited of
elsewhere
an explanation to penetrate
account for
the cross
as defective. (in
the proclamation
of Jesus 'kingdom
contrast is
of the proclamation
of the
(1: 15))
( *) C
closely Although is not
It
is plain
with
that
is
connected
the theme
to hear
preach
exercise is
as followers
present
in 5: 18 in 'to is that
In 9: 14ff,
by Mark.
Best has shown (p. oq* as paradigms and are unable as Jesus for
the early
them - heal
the possessed
they
V
taught that by prayer they would be more successful,
332
is is
only
part
of
the disciples'
lesson
for the
in
and in
dttitude wish
of those to be healed.
(disciples
and those
From our
discussions
in
it
the Temptation
or in'his
But in
defeated,
In response that
to Morton
discussed sought
has not
behind
to what we said
ample evidence
But none of these techniques ) The decisive thing been seen as 'magical' '(140 was the source of Jesus' power-authority,
and that
was the
V
Holy Spirit, So we can repeat to MarkIs Mark, that to use the tem is quite
333
Imagicl to mis-
in relation represent
Jesus-the-Exorcist
in
the
to chap, of the _q
III
the uncertainty
material
can only
Thus we will
brief
comments.
with
it
Q is quite an
as a sayings
contain
of Jesus-the-Exorcist (authorized
the Kingdom of God was inaugurated, and Luke, unlikely (c) that The end of Q thoughE From the l4ff, )-the
by Matthew
Satan was
even finally
(a) that
Although
Hull
if we must see
this
is an accurate
description
of
334
Mat thew Yi- t-Teatmeirt-* of J6siis-th-', purified (see also fashion. his gospel his tradition section) fact of -Exorcist, Has Matthew already
Imagic".
As we have said
next
Hull Hull
What in
used by Jesus'
the Gadarene demoniac(s) and speaking transference elements story, us clear (though of the
confrontation
for
dogmatic
purposes),
in Matthew's retained are exorcisms), (142) Matthew does give Hull's opinion to how Jesus single conducted hii healings,
authoritative It is
I-telaukes'.. Jesus to
I
say that
handed on to his
or committed
them any form of words, (143) did not know any, simple authoritative told - faith. the
As we have just
noted
17: 18fi of
specifically exorcism is
Hull's
assessment
of Matthew
obviously
defective.
(b) that
It
by Held
(144)
- stories
cause to disagree
335
(c) However our investigations factor that have suggested Matthew's another, interthe plight elements
has directed
of Jesus-the-Exorcist. is emphasised,
the demoniacs
are deleted,
as an attack
on Jesus
softened,
is'softened, is eliminated,
of a supernatural is
the final
the demons is begun, the Son of God and on the demoniacs. we sugges-
the story
on Jesus
and not
In Mtt. 15: 21-28 Jesus ted (see p. 171 nature is also (v. 15). of Jesus, highlighted
is motivated
"Lord,
have mercy... of
and there is
is no indication
Jesus being
the authoritative
healer,
If
of
the last
paragraph
of of
is
his
a faithful
tradition,
summary representation
then is a desire what not to motivites, an embardelete and
Matthew's
treatment protrayal
Jesus-the-Exorcist 'magical', or
over
anything but
a certainty serve to
must
(d) Christology
of
the term
'Son-of
David'
in Matthew's The
from his
it use of
in 1: 1.
336
messianic connection use of it 20: 30f. ) (21: 9,15). of (145) - And it into significance of 'Holy of Spirit' the title with the is highlighted title of in by his
in relation
to the healing
the blind
is Matthew who' introduces the exorcism associates stories the (12: 23;
Matthew's with
already
hetaling of
importance above) it
in exorcism that
(p. 10.Z
Matthew made the specific and the 'Son of David' Thus Matthew's of. the last stories parawas
exorcism
reinforces
Matthew's
interest'in
the exorcism,
Christological/Messianic.
(e)
On Matthew's
I understanding
and
interpretation
of
t we should
not neglect
to mention
that
he
the traditional
and Jesus-the-Exorcist.
association of Jesus-the(146) In 15: 21-28 the story the context is one of And
on cleanness
and uncleanness.
theme is
(f)
Finally
it
is
that,
for
Matthew, or
defeated
337
Satan and
26)Fbelow).
In relation by magic".
says that
his
tradition of Luke
treatment
the rest
of Hull's a twentieth
by using
perception century
and understand main thesis regarding by penetrated The use of yet Luke
thought
treatment
makes surprising in
'magical'
to the fact
to Hull's
that
"there magical presents is as much evidence of Jesus' that Luke has toned as there is down the that he of the prac-
aspects
miracles,
such stories
under
influence fact,
the Hellenistic
understanding less
by magical
in Mark! '.
338
How then does Luke treat (a) Though he does not stage, place Jesus and his exorcisms? in the centre of the key
Jesus-the-Exorcist
of his
the preaching
and being
the three
in understanding above)
(p., 10: 18 x4; L above) and of exor cism not of the presence
seems that
work
is God himself as an exorcist at (152) (8: 3q; cf. 7: 16). This has influenced the way he For Luke Jesus the exorcism Jesus' stories. in 4: 31-37 So as we saw over the demons is emphasised The above)
(b)
has related
(pp"; Zf above)
authority violent
less
situation motivation
and there
above).
(c)
in
the Luke
in exorcism. in 9: 1f.
interest.
In fact
as Jesus, inability.
9: 37-43)
339 that
of Satan and
5.3,5
If,
part the
of
to refrom (1,53)
a puzzle.
is
that
reflected
aq he is not reflected
historically,
by Grayston, it is
the Synoptic Tradition. (154) However, in the that Jesus was in is omitting a to his
so far,
clear
an exorcist part
Gospel in not
significant exorcisms.
referring
(b) exorcisms
unlikely portrayal
is-the
view
that
of Jesus'
ministry of
about
the, 'magicall
aspect
be attempting
of healing
because not
does he include
, rTv
7,11 r%
but he also
includes
the use of
Fridrichsen found
offers
that
exorcisms
demonism has been condensed and to suggest fought against that it was
'Darkness' isolated
exorcisms
that
Jesus
campaign stand
against
Jn. 9: 5. is 'part' a
saying
the light
(158) There are two other solutions that are worth consideringv
The Johannine
theory
of miracles
is
in summed up
signs
in
book; is
Jesus
the Christ, in
the Son of God, and that his name". are important be led this that
works
of Jesus performed
so and is
to faith should
in Jesus
as the Messiah
With
in effect, glory
of Jesus'
and led
believing to be noted
3: 2; 6: 2).
Also
the'Fourth
V
describe 'works' 5: 36; should God for miracle which Jesus' are also 7: 21; 9: 4; manifest. John's story they miracles (e, g, 7: 21) and importantly the work of _God That Jesus' these
341
seen as being 10: 25-38; his glory (e, g, 4 t43; miracles,
14: 10f, ),
are related,
A glance
at
the miracles
them would have seemed to first no exact but being healing be very parallels, pared with At first at all literature, parallel to the
changing of water into (159) legend the story contains filled with wine,
special (160)
of religion
in ancient special in
miracle for
of
cites (163)
'parallels'
magicians
were only
apparitions story
the feeding
miracle
spectacularl
Food is
to be multiplied
in vast
to feed thousands,
V
there is more food of left over than was originally (6: 15-21) (164) available, has many
342
the walking
- notably also
related
man would
mentioned
the giving
would that in
hardly
of Lazarus
a spectac-
miracle.
because it is
there
to the Johannine
clear
extraordinary
miracles, stories
have seen of the NT era,. exorcism this by all category kinds as they
individuals. of symbolize
Johannine of
miracles
the total
example
'power
was probablydays
of a man-four
(e) of Jesus
tradition to the
the exorcistic
activity chap, IV
'Kingdom
(see God' of
V above), But in the Johannine tradition little is not not is made of surprising feature, of It the
343
that may
should
may also
be that
concept
Kingdom of God,
In contrast
where the Kingdom of God is mentioned not not fit of this world (18: 36), (3: 3). Into it already this it
(3: 5) and is to
would be difficult
of Mtt, 12: 28/Lk, ll,. 19 (cf. M. ltl5) inaugurated present for by Jesus all and strongly
7: 22),
These seem to me to be the two most likely there it are no exorcism stories to be found another
reasons
why
in John.
However
may be worth M
considering In 5,2.1
possible that
factor, mention
above it but -
We also Jesus
arose
relation words,
than
doing. is
In other faithfully
the Synoptic
tradition
reflecting
history,
criticism With
away from the miracles this in mind it to Jesus' . Justin, (167) and (including is miracles
Quadratust
attitudes (166)
the miracles
of Jesus
V the exorcisms)'suffered
The way the Johannine Jesus, to later and its
avoidance of
criticism
the exorcisms
Conclusion.
with might some of
In this
the suggestions
poraries. that
doubt
been offered.
unlikely
that,
observing
bystanders Messiah,
or a necromancer, a corrective
another
by his
contem-
by three
points, variety of
was a great in
which
that
of Eleazar
by Josephus,
was of little
significance,
there
like central
in healer 1 Qap-Gen Abraham the of , where there contained was material, stories both Hellenistic
interest; which
V
prophets exorcisms relied which variety or philosophers, relied on special force There were traditions techniques of of and others in which which
345
on a combination
categories of
to the material
ded on the performance depended on the person effectiveness. I can see, to portray accusation chap. no hint reviewed category 'good' cannot or II apart Secondly
traditions, himself
of the exorcist it is
conspicuous tradition's
that,
so far objective
the only
to bear
activity ).
the exorcisms of Jesus would (171) for as the origin of Jesus 10) indicate the upright
Q4, (I ) Abraham FGtn and Noah (Jubilees of could of the simply 'exorcist'. be used to reflect
It discussion Jesus
is
appropriate with
then
that
conclude
this
'transcended'
but that
it
is improbable
that his
contemporaries
attempted
346
to use any categories exorcisms - save that or 'labels' to assess him and'his reflected Acts on whether 10: 38). For
they or
probably 'evil'
(cf, man
of Jesus were yet. another a most important part of Jesus' aspect, ministry, that to do per-
of his
haps for
which was conscripted Jesus was the Messiah. this we will see in that
the next in
above)
the exorcism
and motivation
vi
to our study
it
was
of this is
aspect
possible,
of Jesus'
day debate
exposure of Jesus'
telling
in 1926
the depths
of Jesus' will
soul be able
will to
remain
a mystery
no source
uncover...
But this view
JIM
is now being called into question. For
vi
348
'Uhile a biography of Jesus in is indeed impossible,
the modern sense which in self-awareness and his world, that and does Jesus'
growth
of himself
at all
about at
experience
do in it
this is
brief
chapter
is
test
this
possible
of his
exorcisms,
as an exorcist?
in
it
is
of
in the
Controversy'
us a great ministry.
exorcistic
Arguably is the
saying
in
this
already
authenticity Jesuql
tell
us about
he cast
However
vi
349
is better to Bay that it was by the Spirit of God
it that
Jesus cast it
as we have seen (pp, 31cadJZ2. the Jews were the Spirit that is
above) already
was by the power of God that casting out demons, and it here. is
In a+se
Jesusjs'4uite is in the
........... loower-authoritv
techniquesl
in this
aware of an
here,
lotherly' M' -
power as if
for
this
was particularly
with
significant
whom we have dealt
and relied
outside
on, just
this
kind of power, -
of themselves.
0
But we have also of significance (p. 213above). claiming that If in this this
argued verse is
that but
not
only
is is
so also
correct
performed
eschatQlogical
the eschatological
the Kingdom of God had come. In other for Jesus the hoped for
because because
of the activity it
of the Holy in
out
demons. Thus it
correct
"where
vi
350
is there is the Kingdom". (5) Jesus' consciousness
the Spirit
is better
operative
reflected
in Jesus
there
is
From what has been said exorcism Kingdom(7) were not preparatory but were themselves
so far, for
for
Jesus,
the
operation
authentic
saying
in
the Beelzebul is
controversy of
to which
the Parable
out
of Satan
(see
p.. 24 above).
The binding Satan was expected 1 Enoch 10: 4ff., reviewing saw that was that suggestion Jesus this cast is
of the powers
of evil
or the demise of
Jesus-the-Exorcist contemporary
acclamation This
out a demon an amazed crowd says - ItSurely The consensus that of the
the Son of David? " (Mtt. 12: 23). among scholars is that it was
opinion
vi
351
would defeat That is there Satan is by casting (see demons pelcil out connecting the in
nothing of Satan.
examining involvement
written
Secondly,
potentially
Messianic-expectation in
in authentic it
Jesus,
that
connection
But what was the nature Jesus had in mind? That final
.......... -.. .0. .
of
the defeat
of Satan the
that
is,
and complete
defeat
of the
defeat different
question
of the defeat
of Satan
can be detected
in
the Gospels.
origin?
sayings
about
the defeat
of
Satan
tied
to Jesus'
exorcisms
vi
352
this we =t is place three other passages in particular.
side
The first
thought beyond
element,
passages
we are about
to mention,
in Revelation
of the last'time
(20: 10;
18: 7,10,15)
torment
it
seems likely
that
Matthew
time.
places
the
of the demons in
the last
Second to be noted
the fire.
clearest
expression
of when Matthew
thinks
finally
cursed, his
be defeated
into
angels".
comes in a unit is
on the Last
Matthean that so thoroughly (11) In this verse, own work. and the for Matthew is at the end
previous of time,
the Last
Mark's
view
is
less
clear.
in so far Church of
the task
he does not
in the
Like Beelzebul
Evangelists
exorcism Jesus
and casting
the disciples
casting after
inspiration
(22: 39 cf(Acts
an exorcism
Jesus'
John's
that
let
us see
(p, 339above)
to them. Particularly talking this trace defeat linked over about his world this be cast
of Jesus
Yet
we must put
thou So
shouldst
onett(17: 15).
vi
354
John saw Satan as being defeated in the death of
even if
not saying Satan was finally community still had to deal with
references
of Satan ( 14)
defeated
or destroyed (15)
. sayings in Jesus' iO is
in Jesus'
ministry
let -
alone in
in the
minist;!
Yet over
against
the future
we need to take
the parable of the Weeds (18) 24-30) - which considers until 'the end'.
to be apparent
shouldwe
conclude
on Jesus'
view
of the
noted
concluding
place
in his
we not
of Satan but
a32 traces
vi
355
When we examined 'The Disciples evidence to Easter. charge that 'to that I Miasion(s) Jesus did I (pp; t37Ff. send disciples we could there in not seems
above)
we found
clear prior
out demons'
the disciples
were involved
work as part
of the
fall
of Satan.
of great in
importancel
even
the conception
of his
warns us as of lReply to
of the
exorcisms to John's
'signs Thus,
exorcism
also and ,
the preaching
to the poor
miracles*
chap. II
that
powerful
exorcists
authorities We also
exorcisms
saw that
name in their
Might we not
exorcism
then
presume that
reflected
in his
own self-consciousness
vi
356
a powerful exorcist?
indeed
it
is in
possible
about
exorcisms.
Dumn (refe3#fig
to the claims
11: 20 and
imply
a clear power:
sense of Jesus'
of his
vii
CONCWSIONS
study
as
suggested for
objective
we noted lack
contrast
relative interest
in Jesus'
present
unbalanced importance
to take
the ministry
of Jesus?
century
Palestinian
background
against in the
Jesus
available
by the Jewish century practised Hellenistic on exorcism Babylonian later Scrollsj Lucian,
healing well
methods.
Palestinians forms
aware of,
of exorcism
were well
cultures. that
magical
Jubilees, Josephus, it
was arguedcould
vii
358
to Jesus' exorcistic on the
out
However it
to rely
NT Apocrypha information
to give
us independent
ideas.
If ranged because
this
is
right those
then which in
there
were exorcisms
that
between
incantations, that
hand those
powers
in literature
in hisiory. century
indigenous -
character
in miracles
done either
by them.
of this,
we examine
a number of points
to unhesitatingly
support - probably
the common an
exceptionally
stories from
qppended to
of other
traditions.
vii
359
is at one with his its environment tradition but not because because the time. the Church adjusted
Gospels early
historical-Jesus-the-Exorcist
3. Virtually
all
defensel to from
the ensuing
the demons, the demons' a distance, home for his using objects
plea
for
(pigsl)
associated his
exorcismsq
at one with
exorcists.
ignore
apart did
Jesus'
ofany
form of aid
incantations
and questions
as some of his
or use a powerful
authority; by saying
he is
seen to
command... "o
On investigating
the various
proposed responses to
Vil
36o
Jesus-the-Exorcist we concluded that the evidence thought Jewish may be the On
this
designation
hand there
Palestine
beyond being
good or evil.
recover
Jesus-the-Exorcist perhaps it
(for
handling
which
Luke actually
with
exorcism
13: 10-17)-
from
the Fourth
Gospel
which
ignores is far
Jesus' less -
thd response
of the Evangelists
The
Jesus
of their
the Messiah;
of a there were
shoots
of a messianic
confession.
UP to the present
Messiah was expected
scholars
have thought
with Satan
that
the
to do battle
through
Vil
361
But so far data as we could the connection see from an analysis between himself. exorcism and of
exorcism.
of relatively
defeated
and the Kingdom of God own experience so that it the took *'tup
connection
an earlier
Satan would
be defeated
at the
lend of time'.
'The Spirit/Finger
elucidates eschatology. that Satan is Jesus' connection
Saying'
between idea
the
that
and that
understanding
we can probably
say that
have been aware of some considerable relation was doing to God and in relation around him.
unigimess
to what he thought
is correct
that -
exorcisms
as the'final
of Satan and the coming of the Kingdom of God to neglect what was of central and fundamental
vii
362
to Jesus is to misrepresent Jesus it the historicalexorcisms expected until the
importance Jesus.
of Satan's
activity
exorcist, exorcisms
the evidence -
exorcism
the Kingdom.
.0
I INTRODUCTION (Notes) 1. The Times 4 September 1980, p. 2. Ef. 2. Casew The Times 26 March 1975, p-41 the 'Barnsley 27 March 1975, p. 6. 3. For example the English informed they publishers me that have sold almost two million'copies Blatty's of William (Corgi, 1971 and Blond and Briggs). London, The Exorcist in John Richards 4. See the bibliographies Us But Deliver (Seaburyr 1974) pp. 226-40; New York, From Evil and Exorcism, , (Grove Some Pastoral Guidelines Deliverance and Healing: 1976) p. 24. Books, Nottingham, 5. Exorcism. The Report Convened by the of a Commission (ed. ) Dom Robert (SPCK, Petitpierre Bishop of Exeter 'reports' 1972) p. 26. For other Church London, see Richards Exorcism p. 3 n. 2. 6 in D. Cupitt in Theology Explorations 6. Reprinted 1979) pp. 50-3, (SCM, London, from p. 50. quotation (ed. ) Exorcism 7. Cf. J. H. Crehan in Pdtitpierre pp. 11-5; "Exorcism in the New Cupitt'Ibid. also K. Grayston p. 51; Ep. R 2(1975) Testament" pp. 90-4. 8. See James D. G. Dunn "Demythologizing of Myth - The Problem in New Testament*lnteri3retation (ed. ) in the New Testament" (Paternoster, 1977) p. 289 and n. 20. Exeter, I. H, Marshall (ed. ) C. H. Talbert 9. Reimarus: (SCM, London, 1970) Fragments, (1906, Quest of the Historical 10. See A. Schweitzer'The Jesus London,. 1910) pp. 52 and 57. ET, Black, (1864, ET, Fortress, 11. The Life 1975) Philadelphia, of Jesus p. 209, cf. p. 205. 12. Schweitzer Quest p. 64, cf. Schleiermacher L ife p. 224. (1835, ET, 1846, reprinted 13. D. F. Strauss The Life of, jesus 1892, SCM, London, 19731. 14. See Dunn "Demythologizing... ". p. 289. 15. Schweitzer Quest pp. 97ff.. 16. Ibid. p. 111; cf. James D. G. Dunn and Graham H. Twelftree "Demon-Possession in the New Testament" and Exorcism Churchman 94(. 1980) p. 210., 1900). 17. (1899-1900 ET, Williams Norgaie, London, and , 18. Ibid. p. 24. 19., Ibid. p. 25. 20. -Ibid. Cf. Grayston Ep-R 2(1975) pp. 28f.. pp. 90-4 who in the NT. to play down exorcism wises 21. R. H. Hiers "Satan, Demons, and the Kingdom of God" He specifies Schweitzer, SJT 27(1974) Bultmann, p. 35 and n. 2. "On a Cf. James S. Stewart Morton Enslin and Pannenburg, in New Testament Neglected Emphasis Theology" SJT 4(1941) The Significance of the Miracle pp. 292-301 and James Kallas (SPCK, London, 1961) p. l. Stories (Fortress, 22. RGGJ III ET, Jesus Philadelphia, cols. 619-53, 1973); Rediscovering the Teaching cf. N. Perrin of Jesus (SCM, London, 1967) pp. 42 and 250. 23. G. Bornkamm Jesus of Nazareth (1956, ET, SCM, London, 1960) chap. 8. 24. Cf. Hiers SJT 27(1974) p. 35 n. 2.
I 25.
364
(SCM, London, 1979) pp. 142-59. Cf. B. F. Meyer The Aims (SCM, London, 1979) pp. 154-8. of Jesus 26. This is evident in the search for criteria which historians for the historical-Jesus. use in the search Much work has been done on the, ipsissima vox/verba of Jesus (for "An exami-nation example see D. G. A. Calvert of the for Distinguishing the Authentic criteria Wordsof Jesus" NTS 18 (1971-2) "Authenticating pp. 209-19 and N. J. McEleney Criteria CBQ 34(1972) but and Mark 7: 1-23" pp. 431-60) little facta work has been done on the ipsissima of Jesus (though (Ecclesia see F. Mussner The Miracles of Jesus 1970) pp. 27-39 and "Ipsissima , facta Press, Shannon, Jesu? " Th. R 68(1972) cols. 177-85). 27. The Miracles (Brill, 1965) pp. 339-414. Leiden, of Jesus 28. For example Anton Fridrichsen The Problem of Miracle (1925, ET, Augsburg, Minneapolis, 1972) pp. 102ff.; Alan Richardson The Miracle Stories of the Gospels (SCM, London, 1941) parts Mussner Miracles of chap. III; R. H. Fuller Interpreting the Miracles pp. 41ff.; (SCM, London, 1963) pp. 29ff. 29. Significance 5 and 6. chaps. 30. The same is to be said of R. Leivestad Christ the (SPCK, London, 1954) J. M. Robinson Conqueror The ProRem in Mark (SCM, London, 1957); of History and G. Theissen (Gatersloh Urchristliche Wundergeschichten Verlagshaus 1974). Gerd Mohn, Gatersloh, 31. Jesus the Jew (Collins, 1973). London, Cf. P. Fiebig Adi: 3che Wundergeschichten des neutestamentlichen (Mohr, 7ftingen, Zeitalters 1911) pp. 71ff. who sets Jesus' Rabbipic. miracles against an exclusively milieu. 32. Hellenistic Magic and the Synoptic (SCM, Tradition 1974). London, 33. R. Bultmann The History (1921, Tradition of the Synoptic 1963) p. 231, cf. ET, Blackwell, oxford, 38; cf. M. Dibelius (19332, to Gospel From Tradition ET, Clarke, 1971) London, V and VI. chaps. 34. (Gollancz, 1978). London, 35. To my knowledge Uteratareis: the most important. "The Demonology F. C. Conybeare JQR of the New Testament" 8(1896) pp. 576-608,9(1897) pp. 59-114,444-70,581-603; T. K. Oesterreich Possession Demoniacal (ET, Kegan and Other Paul, Trench, Trubner, London# 1930); B. Noack Satanas und (Gads Forlag,, Kbenhavn, Soteria 1948); E. Langton Essentials (Epworth, 1949); London, S. Eitrem Some Notes of Demonology (Brgger, Osloae, on the Demonology of the New Testament 1950); Otto Bo"cher Dmonenfurcht und DAmonenabwehr (Kohlhammer, 1970); StuttgarL, and see also Dunn and etc., Twelftree Churchman 94(1980) pp. 215ff.. 36. See ns. 4 and 5 above.
11
ii BACKGROUND AND SETTING (Notes) 1. As the Synoptic the whole of the NT and indeed stories do not touch ignore this on the exorcism of places we shall (see "An Incantation for S. Langdon of aspect exorcism Expelling Demons-from For a House" ZA 2(1925) pp. 209-14). -ee ; for example definitions Eitrem of exorcism other RGG3 II cols. 832ff.; Notes pp. 20 and 57; C. H. Ratschow IDB II p. 199; J. M. Hull IDB(SUpp. ) p. 312i I. Mendelsohn 2. Contrast Ibid. Mendelsohn 94(1980) 3. See Dunn and Twelftree Churchman pp. 215-9; also B8cher Christus IDB I pp. 822ff.; T. H. Gaster and D9monenfurcht. 'Hellenistic' 4. On the history and of the use of. the labels 'Jewish' in NT scholarship "The Study of see A. F. J. Klijn AlHengeL 419-31; ! ES 20(1973-4) Christianity" Jewish pp. (1973, ET, SCM, London, 1974) 1 Judaism and Hellenism pp. lff.. 5. See Hengel Ibid. 6. Victor Tcherikover Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews 1977) p. 90. (Atheneum, New York, 7. on the insular of Judaism nature and its reaction against impact and example M. Hengel Jews, Greeks see for outside 1980) pp. 123f.. (1976, ET, SCM, London, Barbarians Parties 8. See also Morton Smith Palestinian and Politics 1971) chap. III, (Columbia New York and London, University, (1967, in the Time of Jesus ET, SCM, Jerusalem J. Jeremias 1969) chap. III; London, Ibid. and Hengel chap. 12. 9. R. C. Thompson The Devils Spirits and Evil of Babylonia (Luzac, 2 Vols. 1903-4); London, C. W. King Babylonian Magic (Luzac, 1896). London, on dating and Sorcery see Thompson Ibid. Vol. I p. XI who says they were known to Asshurbanipal's in the seventh Jastrow them much century. places scribes (Ginn, (The Religion Boston, of Babylonia and Assyria earlier literature 1898) pp. 257f. ). For other secondary see H. W. F. (Sidgwick that Saggs The Greatness was Babylon and Jackson, Londcrk, 1962) chap. 10 (includes a discussion of ancient demonology). Babylonian ff. ). Religion 10. See aastrow p. 296(and 11. Thompson Devils I p. 13, cf. p. XXV. I pp. 103,119ff.. 12. For example Thompson Devils 13. Further Vol. II pp. XXVIIIff.. see Ibid. 14. Ibid. Vol. I p. 17. 15. Ibid. pp. 51(-61). f.. 16. Cf. King Magic pp. xxvii lines twenty 17. Most probably of about an incantation the exorcists words of command to the demon; containing I pp. 105ff.. see Thompson Devils 18. Ibid. Vol. II p. 71, cf. pp. 77ff.. 19. See also Langton Essentials pp. 30f.. 95ff., 20. Thompson Devils See also pp. 19ff., II p. 109. (and 151). and Vol. I pp. 103,119 21. For example Thompson Devils I p. 3.
ii
366
22. Ibid. p. 125. 23. ibid. Vol. II p. XLI. 24. As this has more to do with NT-demonology than parable Jesus as an exorcist it in this we will not be discussing study. 25. Ibid. (etc. ). pp. 85, cf. 8, Vol. 1 pp. 205,207 26. Ef. Saggs Babylon chap. 14 "Legacy and Survival". 27. Langton Essential pp. 2off.. 28. Note especially (pp. 10-34 and notes) Ibid. who has given taken up into the many examples of Babylonian notions*being literature. Rabbinic 29. See L. Herzfeld Handelsgeschichte der Juden des Altei: bms (Meyer, Braunschweig, 1894) pp. 22f, 129f., and "The Economy of Judea in the Period 141f. and J. Klausner in The World History of the Second Temple" of the Jewish (ed. ) M. Avi-Yonah People. The Herodian Period (Allen, 1975) pp. 179-205 London, and notes and bibliography. 30. Note J. Neusner A History of the Jews in BabyloniaI (BriLl, 1965) pp. 41ff. Leiden, Jerusalem 1 Jeremias pp. 66ff.. 31. Cf. Langton Essentials p. 10. 32. Literature: (Kegan Paul, E. W. Budge Egyptian Magic 1899) Trench, Trubner, London, Clark' R-. T-. Myth Symbol P. and (Thames and Hudson, 1959), London, F. Lexa La Magie dans 3 Vols (Geuthner, 1'Egypte Antique 1925), Paris, A. Erman (1904, Religion A Handbook of Egyptian ET, Constable, 1907). London, 33. For other Vol. -2 and P. Ghalioungui see Lexa Ibid. papyri in Anci; *nt Egypt Magic and Medical Science (Hodder and 1963) pp. 48ff.. Stoughton, London, jer 34. About 1500 BC but containing B. Ebbell ol. material. (Ejnar The Papyrus Ebers Munksgaard, Copenhagen and Oxford University, 1937), and C. P. Byran Ancient London, (Geoffrey Egyptian Medicine Bless, 1930). Londonj 35. Eb. P I, XXX, LVII, LX, LXIX(bis), XC, XCII, XCV, CVIII. XCVIII, 36. See also Lexa La Magie I chap. 5. 37. Cf. Ghalioungui Magic p. 35. 38. For text, introduction translation, and commentary see 2 Vols. J. H. Breasted, The Edwin Smith Papyrus (University 1930). Chicago, of Chicago, 39. On the men of healing Magic chap. VII; see Ghalioungui "Professional A. H. Gardiner Magicians in Ancient Egypt" PSBA 39(1917) pp. 31-44. 40. This is also found in incantations to not related 501: VI: 10ff. In P. Harris is to the speaker exorcism. assume the identity of the god Menu in working against a demon of the water. See Erman Handbook pp. 150ff.. 41. Breasted Smith Vol. 1 pp. 476, quotation from p. 477. See for example PGM V: 172,439,459. 42. See A. H. Gardiner in the British Hieratic Papyri Museum 3rd Series, Vof-. I (British Museum, London, 1935) dates 1250-1100 Gardiner this BC. pp. 50f.. around
11
367
(University in Magical 43. See C. Bonner Studies Amulets of 1950) pp. 8,22-261 Ann Arbor, W. M. F. Petrie Michigan, (Constable, 1914) pp. 1-7; London, F. Lexa La Magie Amulets. Also I. E. S. Edwards I chap. 41 Budge Magic chap. II. in the British Museum 4th Series, Vol. I Papyri Hieratic (British 1960) pp. xviii, Museum, London, xix. 44. Literature: Ancient Records of Egypt see J. H. Breastdd (University 1906) p. 18h. b; Chicago, Vol. III of Chicago, Romans et Contes Egyptiens Gustave Lefebvre (Adrien-Maisorreuvep 1949) pp. 224f.. Paris, in A. Erman Storici II pp. 48f. 45. Rosellini Monumenti Karnak temples ZAS 21(1883) p. 58 and n. 3. on the ancient Art and the Cults of Osiris and Amon see E. Otto Egyptian 1968) pp. 85-97. (1966, ET, Thames and Hudson, London, 46. On the god Khonsu see especially H. Bonnet Reallexikon (Gruyter, 1952) der Agyptischen Religionsgeschichte Berlin, Gods of Ancient W. A. Jayne The Healing pp. 140ff.; (Yale University, 1925) pp. 68ff.; New Haven, Civilization (Hutchinson's Religion University. Egyptian J. Cverny' Ancient 1952) pp. 18,73,120f. Library, London, and Otto Art, p. 96. Records 47. From Breasted pp. 193f.. him in IDB Supp. p. 313. 48. Hull Magic_p. 62, cf. Romans p. 221 n.. 2; cf. A. Erman 49. From Lefebvre ? 'Die Bentreschstele" ZAS 21(1883) pp. 54-60. 50. Breasted Records p. 189. human'forml 51. Khonsu was given see S. Morenz Egyptian (1960, ET, Methuen, 1973) p. 264, and London, Religion Bonnet Reallexikon pp. 140ff.. 52. Cf. Breasted Records p. 189; Otto Art p. 96. date of this 53. These points the idea of the late support in the time of may have its origin stele , though the story (ed) Amarna Letters 20, pp. 13-29; II; Ramses see Winkler 59f. 21(1883) 188f. Erman Records ZAS Breasted pp. and pp. cf. , 25ff.. 54. See Clark-athpp . 55. See also PGM Vol. I p. 67. 2. 56. The Goddess of Surrye by H. Chadwick 57. See the discussion of Celsus' of origin place 1953) (Cambridge University., Cambridge, Celsium Contra Origen: f.. pp. xxviii B8. See also Galen de composit. V: 2 and John medicament 8.4; b. Kidd. 49h. Chrysostom, Hom. Matt. 59. Hengel Judaism I p. 158 and notes. 60. See Jewish V p. 60; S. W. Baron A Social Encyclopedia and University, Religious History of the Jews Vol. I (Columbia 1952) p. 213 and note 1; I New York and London, Hengel Judaism Jeremias Jerusalem pp. 69f. '. and 76 and notes7 pp. 68ff. 61. Jeremias Ibid. Ibid. and Hengel pp. 17 and 101. 62. Hengel I. See also chap 1: 3 and 4, p. 101 and notes. "A Study in the Commercial Between G. McLean Harper Relations in the Third AJP Egypt and Syria Century Christ" Before 49(1928) Smith Parties and and notes; pp. 1-35; chap. III Jeremias Ibid. 12: 186f.. 63. Josephus Ant.
ii
368
"Some Early 64. A. Montgomery Amulets. from Palestine" JAOS 31(1911) pp. 272-81. (Pantheon 65. E. R. Goodenough Jewish Symbols Books for Foundation, New York) Vol. 1 (1953) pp. 165f. the Bollingen (1953) Figs. 379-81. and Vol. III 66. If we are correct 'Das altjddische then L. Blau 1898', p. 84) is incorrect Triabner, Strasbourg, Zauberweseny incantations that to think charms and came from the than Palestinian Jews. Babylonian rather 67. Most of which has been published by Karl Preisendanz 3 vols. (Teubner, Graecae Magicae Leipzig Papyri and Vol. 3 is extremely Berlin). rare and not easily (see Hull Magic p. 8 and n. 15). For more recent accessible 11Zur OberVeferungsgeschichte discoveries see Preisendanz in Aus Der Welt Des Buches Georg Magie" der Spatantiken (Otto Harrassowitz, 1950) Leyh Festgabe Leipzig, Zauberpapyri" C WE griechische and "Ce pp. 223-40; 26(1951) On the history pp. 405-9. of the collection to PGM Vol. 1; see the introduction material of this GriechischeRgyptischen Offeribarungszauber I T. Hopfner (Hassel, 1921); in Buches and Preisendanz Leipzig, Magic pp. 5ff.. Hull (Bible 68. Around the turn Adolf Deissmann of the century (1895 and 1897, ET, T&T 1901); Clark, Edinburgh, Studies (1908, ET, Hodder and New Light on the New Testament 1927)) made the first London, Stoughton, major contribution (on for NT research of the magical papyri on the importance important Magic pp. 16f. ). Another work see Hull earlier Uller's Heit; Im Namen Jesustudy study was Wilhelm (Vandenhoeck 1903) which placed G8ttingen, & Ruprecht, the Christians' use of Jesus' milieu. name in a magical (History for example p. 232) made a few Bultmann has also to the magical papyri and Barrett references irit to them (eg. C. K. Barrett H1S made some references the Gospel Tradition (SPCK, London, 1947) and 69. Magic pp. 5ff.. 1952) 70. For !xample V. Taylor Mark (Macmillan, London, The Cross in the New Testament p. 355; Leon Morris (Paternoster, 1967) pp. 56f.. Exeter, 71. But see C. K. Barrett The New Testament Background (SPCK, London, 1957) pp. 29-36. in Scripture 72. Cf. A. Macpherson's review of Hull 5(1974) Bulletin p. 48. 73. Ibid. Full 74. Magic p. 26. 'forward' 75. Ibid. Another example of this pp. 20-7. by Thompson Devils ideas is given I of religious stab_il_ity A Selection H. Gollancz of Charms cf. pp. XLIV; ('Actes du onzi&e international des Orientalistes" Congre (London, 1898) p. X.
dated from the second to the fourth 76. Variously century, literature 180f. I Vol. PGM cited there pp. and see 77. The-writer of these incantations makes good use of On this papyrus Goodwin concludes - "the Egyptian gods.
11 fundamental
369
ideas from old Egyptian seem to be derived (C. W. Goodwin Fragment Work religion" of Graeco-Egyptian (Cambridge Antiquarian Society)(Deighton, Macmillan, 1852) p. 39). But this identification formula Cambridge, is by no means confined is to this Notable papyrus. (cf. XXXVI: 335-339). PGM XII: 228-239 See also ! Z4z'At "A Propos des in PGM Vol. III; A. J. Festugiere d'Isis" HTR 42(1949) Ar4tologies pp. 221f. where the himself identifies with a variety of gods speaker (see Eitrem, Notes p. 24 n. 2). 'Egyptian 78. indeed the early Book of of the part identification the Dead' also has this of a speaker with The Egyptian Book of the Dead the gods (see T. G. Allen (oriental Institute Publications, 1960)). And Chicago, later Iamblichus the union thenmuch mentions of god and (lamblichus 7: 6). healer and the power the healer gains 39. 79. Cf. Eitrem. Notes p. 24 and Goodwin Fragmentp. 80. Hull Magic p. 150 ns. 36 and 37. 81. Further in Hull Ibid. This that pp. 27ff.. stability for was aided by at least two things. we have been arguing it seems as if papyri Firstly were handed down from father IV: 2518 and A. S. Hunt "A Greek to son (PGM I: 192ff.; cf. PBA 15(1929) Cryptogram" pp. 131f. ). Secondly, as Hunt insisted are repeatedly and secrecy on caution noticed, (PGM 1: 130; IV: 1872) and magical books-were to be hidden (Ibid. See also E. W. Lane Manners p. 132). and Customs of the Vol. I (Knight, Modern Egyptians London, 1842) chanter XII; (Watts, 1909) Myth, Magic and Morals Lonaon, F. C. Conybeare Deissmann Studies p. 323. pp. 241f.; 82. See F. G. Kenyon Greek Payri in the British Museum I (British 1893) pp. 64f.. Museum, London, 83. Cf. PGM IV: 1230-40. (which 84. One incantation, is too long to PGM V: 99-171, is a particularly good example of an exorcistic quote here) (Preisendanz incantation. See Kenyon Papyri I pp. 64-81. for his text saw this papyrus never contains many clearly inaccuracies). Another text complete worth minor is a second to fifth from Hebrew amulet century consulting by Montgomery JAOS 31(1911) Palestine published pp. 272-281. in gaining 85. This diffivulty the attention and aid of the is illustrated by the often power-authority prospective found direction to repeat P. Warren 25ff. an incantation. includes the words "Come to me, god of god, this times many say ... ... 'Abra ao If it again delays, na ... speak thus aloud I beg you! ". the things give me an answer concerning 242ff.. 86. Cf. PGM XIII: "Unless his name, on his the demoniac speaks giving be brimstone they should and asphalt, nose shall immediately". speak and leave ("The Technique HTR 3 6(1943)* C. Bonner of Exorcism" p. 42 and this that calling n. 10) thinks on the demon to give uD his
ii
370
his nature but'simply to get the name is not to discover itself. demon to identify However the name of something was thought to be so bound up with its nature,, and Test. Sol. (passim) so associates a demon's name and nature that it that the exorcists in the PGM represented seems most likely and were seeking not simply a demon's name but his character nature. 87. See also PGM XXXVI: 42ff.. 88. See also Goodwin Fragment p. 39 and Montgomery JAOS 31(1911) p. 274 where the exorcist uses the name of Yahweh. 1227ff. 89. Cf. lines In PGM V: 161ff. the incantation directs the user to put the papyrus with the names (of the ) across his forehead and to turn to the power-authority? (cf. P. Warren 52ff. 1 north and repeat the incantation
H. I. Bell, A. D. Nock and Herbert Thompson PGM XXXVI: passim.; from a Bilingual "Magical in the British Texts Papyrus "Die Preisendanz Museum" PBA 17(1931) pp. 235-287; Zaubertafeln" AP 11(1935) und lateinischen griechischen ' pp. 161ff.. is considerable. 90. The literature The most on 'amulets' important are C. Bonner Amulets studies note his bibliography III and chapters and VII; and pp. xix ff. E. R. Goodenough Symbols Vol. II chap. 7-azid-footnotes. Studies 91. See Deissmann p. 352. , 92. Cf. PGM IV: 3014 and V: 125ff.. 93. Cf. Goodwin Fragment p. 41. On 'Abrasaxl see A. Dieterich des spa'te36 Abraxas. Studien zur Religionsgeschichte (Tembner, Leipzig, 1891) ; Bell (et alJ PBA Alterturns 17(1931) p. 271; Bonner Amulets, p. 192. 94. For example PGM IV: 3028ff. and V: 474. Also IV: 409ff.; Jff.; XIXA; XVIIa; Cf. Bonner Ibid. XLI. XXXIII: ppw332f.; I pp. 255 ff.. Kenyon Papyri (PGM V: 142f.; 95. For example to form strange sounds see also 1: 12). 96. For example PGM XLIV. I: 13ff.; See also PGM XLII; II: 165ff.. 97. B. Lindars and P. Borgen "The Place of the Old in the Formation Theology: Testament of New Testament NTS 23(1976-7) C. H. Dodd Prolegomena and Response" pp. 59-75; (Nisbet, 1952) esp. London, to the Scriptures According by J. D. G. Dunn Unity and cited and also the literature 1977) pp. 425f.. (SCM, London, Diversity in particular 98. on demonology Essentials see Langton On the wider use of the OT in first chap. 2 and see below. Palestine see R. T. France Jesus and the Old century 5. 1971)'chap. (Tyndale, London, Testament ("The Demonology 99. W. O. E. Oesterley of the Old (1907) by Psalm XCV Exp. 16-18 illustrated Testament, intention has argued that the original of pp. 132-51) form against in devotional Psalm was "a polemic, this demons" oneself against methods of securing current (p. 134).
11
371
(11 QPsApa),, de psaumes apocryphes 100. "Un petit rouleau. in Tradition Cf. D. C. Duling und Glaube pp. 128-40. "Solomon, Exorcism, HTR 68(1975) and the Son of David" p. 239. 101. Ploeg in Tradition und Glaube p. 128. 102. Cf. Duling HTR 68(1975) p. 239. in the Judeah Desert 103. J. A. Sanders Discoveries of 1965) p. 92, esp. line 10 Oxford, Jordan IV (Clarendon, und Glaube pp. 128f.; of col. 27. Ploeg in Tradition Ibid. Duling b. Ber. 6a, 55bl 104. See also b. Sot. 8bi b. Pes. lllb; 16a; Midrash b. Yoma 53b; b. San. 103a; b. Taan. lla, on Dt. 6: 6; Num. 11: 5; 12: 3. (1907) p. 151; I. H. Marshall Lwke 16-18 EM. 105. See Oesterley (Marshalle (Paternoster, 1978) p. 173. D. Hill Exeter, Matthew 1972) p. 101. Londonj Morgan and Scott, 106. Cf. Mk. 16: 17f.. 107. France Jesus p. 152. W. O. E. Oesterley 108. Uterature: An Introduction to the (SPCKi London, 1935) pp. 170f.; Apocrypha Bookh of-the (Harper Times History R. H. Pfeiffer and of New Testament 1949) pp. 258ff. New York, Brothers, and notesl (Blackwell, 1966) The Old Testament Oxford, 0. Eissfeldt gistory The II People of the Jewish p. 5831 E. Schiirer 1891) pp. 43f.; (T It T Clark, Edinburgh, A. Wikgren IDB IV p. 662. History 109. See Pfeiffer pp. 273ff., cf. Metzger (Oxford to the Apocrypha University,. An Introduction 1977) pp. 31f., New York, cf. n. 110 below. J. T. Milik See R. Meyer RGG3 VI col. 907; 110.4Q Fragment. 88; esp. p. 522 n. 3; "Cave4of Qumran (4Q)" BA 19(1956)p. Ibid. cf. Metzger (Williams Early Zoroastrianism 111. See J. H. Moulton and 1913) pp. 338f. his London, Norgate, and notes; cf. "The Iranian Exp. T 11(1899) Background of Tabit" p. 259. "The Main Source of Tobit" ZAW See also T. V. Glasson "The Iranian 30(1959) D. Winston Component in pp. 257-2771 11 HR 5(1965-6) 183-216; Pfeiffer the Bible pp. .... History pp. 264-I. The Pseudepigrapha J. H. Charlesworth 112. Literature: and (Scholars, 1976) Missoula, Modern Research Textual Studies and Historical pp. 143-7 and J. C. VanderKam (Scholars, 1977) Missoula, in the Book of Jubilees pp. 289ff.. 113.. VanderKam Ibid. chap. III. in the Judean Discoveries 114. D. Barthdlemy and J. T. Milik 1955) pp. 82-4; Oxford, R. de Vaux Desert I (Clarendon, (pl. XVIa)" des Jubiles du Livre "Un fragment en hebreu "Les 'Petites de Grottes' M. Baillet RB 56(1949) pp. 602-5; J. T. Milik Qumran (2Q, 3Q, 6Q, 5Q) RB 63(1956) pp. 54f.; 4 de Qumran (4Q)" RB 63(1956) "La Grotte p. 60; Man-ual (DSD) From "Light W. H. Brownlee of Discipline on the BASOR 125(1951) the Book of Jubilees" pp. 30-21
11
372
ET,, The Jewish Sect of Qumran_(1953, A. Dupont-Sommer 1954) p. 38; B. Noack "Qumran Mitchell, London, Valentine, SEA 22-3 (1957-8) p. 193. and the Book of Jubilees" 22: 16-20; 30: 7-17 and 1QS. 1: 1-241 115. Cf. Jub. 15: 31-2; 8: 4-10,16-9: 2. 5: 7-11; See 116. Cf. for example Jub. 5: 27; 6: 17-32 and IQS. 10: 1-8. "Le calendrier des Jubiles A. Jaubert et de la secte de bibliques" VT 3(1953) Qumran. 8es origines pp. 250-641
7aTe "The Calendar Book of Jubilees, J. Morgenstern of 34-761 5(1955) J. B. Seglxl VT Its Character" Its Origin pp. and Ealendar" "Intercalation VT-7(1957) and the Hebrew Intercalation MethoTof pp. 250-307; E. R. Leach "A Possible for the Calendar of the Book of Jubilees" VT 7(1957) notes. On pp. 197f. cTrTd pp. 392-7; Noack SEA 22-3(1957-8) see other points of contact between 5mran and Jubilees Old. Testament pp. 607f. and ns. 53 and 541 Eissfeldt (Magres, N. Avigad and Y. Yadin A Genesis Apocryphon 1956) pp. 16-39; and Noack Ibid. Jerusalem, pp. 197ff.. 117. Dupont-Sommer Sect p. 38 and n. 1; Eissf; -41dt
W. Noack "Lex insculpta. Old Testament pp. 607f.; )in der Sektenschrift" (111'17? PIY? ZNW 46(1955) p. 139. 118. Noack SEA 22-3(1957-8) pp. 200f. 1 VanderKam Jubilees pp. 280ff..
119. See R. H. Charles The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha oxford, of the Old Testament Vol. II (Clarendon, 1913), p. 10. 120. For example, demons are fallen angels (Jub. 4: 15, 22: 5: 1-9; cf. Jude 61 2Pt. 2: 4), disembodied spirits (Jub. 10: 1-14; cf. Mtt. 12: 43-45/Lk. 11: 24-26)1 ruled by Mastema cause or Satan (Jub. 10: 8; cf. Mk. 3: 22/Mtt. l2: 24/Lk. ll: l5), (Jub. 10: 2 cf. Mk. 9: 17; Mtt. 12: 22/Lk. 11: 14; 13: 11, illness 16 (2Cor. 12: 7)), rule men (Jub. 10: 3,6 cf. Jn. 12: 31; for final judgment 16: 11 (Eph. 2: 2, -6: 12)), and imprisoned (Jub. 10: 5 cf. Mtt. 8: 29: Jude 6). Major 121. Literature: J. A. Fitzmyer The Dead Sea Scrolls Missoula, Publications and Tools for Study (Scholars, 1977). (Collins, 121a G. Vermes The Dead Sea Scrolls London,. 1977) chap; 2, note bibliography. in English_(Penguin, 122. From G. Vermes The Dead Sea Scrolls 1975) p. 219. Harmondsworth, 123. Ibid. p. 220. B. "Healing Through the Laying-on 124. Flusser of Hands in 7(1957) pp. 107f.. a Dead Sea Scroll"'IEJ 125. H. C. Kee "The Terminology of Mark's Exorcism Stories" "A Consideration NTS 14(1967-8) p. 235. Cf. A. A. Macintosh of Hebrew-)Y.111VT 19(1969) pp. 471-9; A. Caquot TDOT III pp. 49-53. 126. As in-Kee Ibid. p. 234. 127. See n. 125 above. 128. Kee NTS 14(1967-8) p. 232 and n. 2; cf. J. A. Fitzmyer Institute, The Genesis Apocryphon of Qumran Cave I (Biblical Rome, 1971) p. 138.
11
373
129. Fitzmyer Ibid. 130. Ibid. 131. Cf. G. R. Driver "The Resurrection of Marine and Terrestrial Creatures" JSS 7(1962) p. 15 and Caquot TDOT III pp. 50f.. 132. Macintosh VT 19(1969) pp. 475ff.. (et al Aramaic 133. B. Jongeli7n-g from Nmran Texts Vol. 1 (Brill, 1976) pp. 124ff.. Leiden, . 134. From Vermes English Ibid. to p. 229. Jongeling adds aFrolmeif its be that this text b0 lVis to mutilated contents cannot .reconstructed or interpreted and so do... not affect our (cf. discussion ). Milik RB 63(1956) pp. 409ff. 135. S. Smith Babyloni"i (Methuen, Historical Texts London, 1924) pp. 36,46,50,781 "The Prayer D. N. Freedman of Nabonidus" BASOR 145(1957) p. 31(f. ); A. Dupont-Sommer The Essene WrTEIngs from Qumran (1959, ET, Blackwell, 1961) p. 323. oxford, 136. Cf. Dupont-Sommer Ibid. and Dn. 5: 13. 137. See also Ibid. A. Dupont-Sommer p. 322 n. 3 177ff. "Exorcismes dans les recits de 0:: umr8n" e gudrisons 7(1959) VT Supp. pp. 246-61. (et al. ) 138. See Milik RB'63(1956) esp. p. 409; Jongeling Aramaic I p. 1267. 139. See n. 137 above. (et al. ) Aramaic 140. iongeling The Book of I p. 128; ALacocque (1976, ET, SPCK, London, Daniel 1979) p. 421 see also J. A. Montgomery The Book of Daniel (T &T Clark, Edinburgh, 1950) p. 163. 141. On forgiveness and healing see for example Loos Miracles Writings pp. 260ff.; cf. Dupont-Sommer p. 325. 142. Literature: Charlesworth Pseudepigrapha pp. 171ff.. 143. Lb-14. p. 170. 144. From M. R. James The Biblical Antiquities of Philo (SPCK, London, 1971) pp. 232f.. 145. See Ibid. p. 233 n.. 146. Mcle_r__DcmonenfqGht pp. 73ff. und die 1 Das Neue Testament Ra"chte d4monischen (katholische 1972) Bibelwerk, Stuttgart, See also b. Pes. 112b. pp. 25f.. 147. See Duling HTR 68(1975) p. 240 and notes. 148. We must exclude because Acts 16: 16-18 from consideration from within it originates the Christian tradition. entirely 149. See J. Jeremias New Testament Theology 1 (1971, ET, SCM, 1971) pp. 5 and 15. Cf. p. X45 amn. SiSbefowLondon, (Tyrolia, 150. Paul Gaechter Das Matthaus Evangelium Innsbruck. 1963) p. 401; Erich Wien, MlInchen, Klostermann (Mohr-, Tdbingen, 1971) p. 109; Matth9usevangelium A. H. McNeile (Macmillan, 1915) p. 127. London, Matthew (Black, 151. F. V. Filson 1971) pp. 149f.; Matthew London, A. R. C. Leaney Luke (Black, 1971) p. 189; P. Bonnard London, (Delachaux Ll Evangile Selon Matthiexj 1970) Paris, et Niestle, TDNT VIII p. 181; E. Schweizer p. 365 n. 215. 152. Literature: (Herder, R. Pesch Das Markusevangelium II 1977) p. 112. Freiburg, 153. For example Bultmann History p. 25 and E. Haenchen Der Weg
11
374
1966) p. 327. Berlin, Jesu (To'pelmann, 154. H. C. Kee Community of the New Age (SCM, London, 1977) Ibid. 1960) Mark (Black, London, p. 43; Bultmann 1 S. E. Johnson Mark p. 407. p. 165; Taylor 155. W. Grundmann Das Evangelium (Evangelische nach Markus 1965) p. 194. Verlagsanstalt, Berlin, 156. For its use in the NT see Bauer. 157. Cremer p. 457. 158. Bauer and Moulton and Milligan. 159. studies See other pp. 197f.. possible similar uses of the dati in Moulton and Milligan. 160. Deissmann Ibid. Cremer. p. 198 quoting 161. History p. 25. 162.9-ee-also Taylor Mark p. 407. (TDNT 1) later 163. G. Kittel on the same page (214) notes (Jn. 11: 31) is the only Rev. 14: 4 as an exception to this. in the Gospels instance Jesus as of4itAtt-BiNbeing used without ) its object. 164. Ibid. 165. Quoted by Bultmann, History, p. 25. 166. Ibid. Rote 167. M. Black An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts (Clarendon, 1967)-pp. 71,169ff. oxford, for an who argues this Aramaic source behind small perico-De. E. Haenchen Die Apostelgeschichte (Vandenhoeck 168. Literature: 1961) p. 665 and R. E. Oster, Go'ttingen, Jr.. A & Ruprecht, Commentary Historical in Success Stories on the Missionary (Ph. D Thesis, Acts 19: 11-40 Princeton Theological Seminary, bibliography. 1974) 169. Ephesus was reCnown fdr: -its 'magical' tradition. Note the 'Ephesia Grammatal; particularly see C. C. McCown "The Ephesia Grammata in Popular Belief" TPAPA 54(1923) pp. 128-40. (On the traffic between Asia and Jerusalem, see Jeremias Jerusalem p. 65). "Acts 170. Beginnings IV p. 2411 B. E. Taylor 19: 14"-Exp. T 57(1945-6) (Clarendon, Oxford, p. 222; R. P. C. Hanson Acts 1967) p. 192; Jeremiaslbo4. I'Sceva B. A. Mastin pp. 175ff.; On the identity Priest" JTS 27(1976) the Chief of pp. 405-12. the exorcists and Luke's purpose see E. Haenchen Acts (Blackwell, 1971) p. 565. See also G. Klein "Der oxford, lstheologische Synkretism Problem: Apg 19: 11-20" ZTK 64(196) pp. 50-60. (T &T 171. J. H. Moulton A Grammar of New Testament Greek 1908). 1 pp. 80f.; Clark, Edinburgh, A. C. Clarke Acts (Clarendon, 1933) pp. 370ff.; Oxford, Moulton and (Tyndale, 1952) p. 359; F. F. Bruce Acts London, Milligan p. 28; B. M. Metzger Commentary A Textual on the Greek New (United Testament Bible Societies, London and New York, 1971J) pp. 470-2; G. M. Lee "New Testament Gleanings" Bibli6a 51 (1970) p. 237. 172. See D. G. Hogarth (British Excavations at Ephesus 1908); Museum, London, W. J. Woodhouse ERE X pp. 302ff.; (Macmillan, C. T. Newton Essays on Art and Archeology London,
11
375
1880) pp. 136-209 esp. 151 and 163; Homer Il^, iad 5: 771 16: 234,6051 Pausanias ii. xii. 2; Origen mentions exorcists at 50. work in the market place CC 1: 68; 111: 173. Hogarth Ibid. pp. 232,238. 174. Only here and in Mk. 5: 7 in the NT. 16, a story which also has no command 175. Cf. Lucian Philops. (see P. 15 below) (et al'. ) PBA 17(1931) p. 251F line 19, 176. See also Beil cf. p. 266. S (Hodder 177. A. T. Robertn Grammar of the Greek New Testament New York, 1919) p. 484; cf. Joshua 6: 26. and Stoughton, 178. Thompson Devils, II p. XLI - quoted more fully p. 15 above. (et al. ) PBA 17(1931) pp. 254f. and 179. See for example Bell 266. 180. As for example D. E. Nineham. Mark (Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1969) P. 153; E. Schweizer Mark (1967, ET, SPCK, London, 1971) p. 386. p. 114; -Loos Miracles HTR 31(1938) 181. W.L. Knox "Jewish Liturgical Exorcisms" p. 195; Oster Acts pp. 54ff.. -24; 1V:34. We have already quoted PGM 182. See alsc7-CC111-: Zj(p. 3034f f. IV: above) and LAB 60 (p. So above) . "The Meaning of &rcK*2a-#5 183. Cf. R. H. Connolly :A Reply" JTS 25(1924) esp. pp. 346-51. 30: 3; 85: 2; Apology 11: 61 Irenaeus 184. See also Dial. Preaching 97. Adv. Haer. 2: 32: 4; Apostolic in Hennecke I pp. 444f.. See also 185. Cf. F. Scheidweiler Apology 1: 35; cf. 1: 48; Eusebius HE 1: 9: 31 Justin Annals 15: 44. See also Acts 4: 16-which seems to Tacitus and contain both,, elements of 'identification' 'glorification'. if Luke 186. our case is not, I think, altered substantially dealing for Jfvn-4; be is responsible we would still -%*5x-y; rrjtas On demons century. about exorcism in the first with notions holy men see Peter Brown "The Rise and Function attacking JRS (61(1971) p. 88. of the Holy Man in Late Antiquity" E. Scharer History 187. Literature: I pp. 61ff.. 188. Ibid. -pp. 43f.. 189. U. St. J. Thackerary Josephus, The Man and the Historian (Ktav, -New York, 1967) p. 98.
190. G. Delling pp. 291-309. "Josephus und das Wunderbare" Nov. T 2(1957)
in 'The Antiquities' 191. G. MacRae "Miracles of Josephus" in Miracles pp. 142ff.. 192. Cf. Ibid. p. 138. 193. History p. 231. to 194. Bultmann History From Tradition p. 222; M. -Dibelius London, 1971) p. 84. Gospel (1933, ET, James Clarke, 195. Miracles p. 33. Tradition 196. For example by Dibelius Barrett pp. 87ff.;
Spirit pp. 56f. (Ant. 8: 46) is Josephus' 197. 'AnoWo it is not used in the NT in relation but term for an exorcism, to exorcism, and only
ii
76
Die Religion in den griechischen M. P. Nilsson Zauberpapyri (Gleerup, Lund, 1948) pp. 63-67. (Cf. 'Ant. 8: 44) P. C. Conybeare 200. ("The Testament of Solomon" JQR 11(1898) that the Testament p-12) asks "Is it possible... (of Solomon] in its form was the very original collection of incantations to Josephus, which, according was composed and by Solomon? " Conybeare bequeathed seems to prefer a positive because to his question the Test. Sol. tallies reply so well However as Charlesworth with what is said in Ant. 8: 45ff.. (Pseudepigrapha does not appear p. 198) points out "Josephus to a particular but to the numerous to be referring text liquid traditions about Solomon's control over demons". 201. See Polybius 31: 12: 1 and Plutarch Histories Moralia 161. C. 202. Cf. for example Ant. 7: 109; Homer Iliad 11: 551 cf. TDNT III H. Schlier p. 674. 203. Schlier Ibid. pp. 673-82, esp. pp. 674f.. 204. Luke (T & ;F-Clark, Edinburgh, 1922) p. 374. 205. As for example Epictetus 3: 1: 15_and probably Discourses Lk. 15: 17. 206. Literature: Schlarer. History I pp. 68ff.. See also Fiebig iladische Wundergeschichten Wundergeschichten and Rabbinische des neutestamentlichen Zeitalters (Marcus und Weber, Bonn, 1911). "New Problems, 207. See J. Neusner New Solutions: Current in Rabbinic Events Studies" SR 8(1979) pp. 408 and 411 and (Prentice Piety Hall, notes; also his From PoliticTto 1972) pp. 7 and 92ff.. Cliffs, (Here I follow Englewood his method "If to the substance refers a later master and language of itself, but evidently the pericope stands outside of both, the pericope we may suppose that was known to him, and therefore comes before or in his time in pretty much its (p. 93). form and wording" present tried Because later to assign to the man who masters sayings than some earlier, said them rather more prestigious "very individual Neusner takes seriously attribution of a to a named authority in a particular saying school and time" (p. 94)). See also Neusner Rabbinic Traditions about the (Brill 3 Phcrisees III 1971) Leiden, C. G. Montefiore p. and , (Macmillan, Anthology 1938) London, and H. Loewe A Rabbinic p. 711.
to healing once (Lk. 13: 12) is it used in relation of any kind. @, 1TLd4j is used by the Evangelists in relation to exorcisms rp-, (Mtt. 4: 24; 12: 22; 17: 16,18: Lk. '6: 18; 7: 21; 8: 2) but it is not: at all distinctive Josephus' of their storieslvSopm*Sis word for those possessed by demons; it is used in this sense only here in Josephus and not at all in the NT. 198. History pp. 238f.. 199. '!:. Blau Daskltju"dische Zauberwesen (TAbner, Strasbourg#, 1898); W.L. Kndx St. Paul and the Church of the Gentiles (Cambridge University, Cambridge, 1939) pp. 208-11;
11 208.
377
SB IV pp. 501-35; Blau Zauberwesen; Langton Essentials esp. chap. Two. 209. See SB Ibid.. (To my knowledge this no one has explained in the Talmud. to healing But if, attitude ambivalent methods dates to these the one assigns where possible, attitudes, debates later over healing methods and magic are generally healing than the material through condoning or encouraging incantations and amulets etc. ). 210. See J. Neusner A Life (Brill, of Yohanan ben Zakkai 1970) Leiden, . Adische (cf. 211. Cf. Vexmes Jesus pp. 64f.; Fielig also 19ff. Wundergeschichten-pp. and Loos Miracles pp. 328-33 212. See G. Vermes "Hanina ben Dosa" JJS 23(1972) pp. 2; -50 Jesus pp. 72-8. pp. 51-64; and 24(1973) 213. See Vermes JJS 23(1972) pp. 30ff.. 214. Literature: H. D. Betz Lukian von Samosata und das Neue (Mademie, Berlin, 1961) bibliography. Testament 215. Cf. R. M. Grant Miracle Law (North-Holland and Natural Company, Amsterdam, 1952) pp. 41f.. Publishing Pliny is another (NH XXVII: iii) who is credulous of the power of tR-e magician and the spoken word. 216. See D. L. Tiede The Charismatic Figure Worker as Miracle 1972) p. 63. (Scholars, Missoula, (see for a reference 217. This has been mistaken to Christ (Loeb) III though Lucian Lucian p. 341 n. l. ). in fact, them, the Christians, as such, were of no noticed elsewhere (Stevens, interest to him, B. Baldwin Studies in Lucian 1973) pp. 101f.. Sarasota, 218. Cf. PQ : 26 "pronounceo'shortly for spiritual threatening". 219. See Dunn and Twelftree Churchman 94(1980) and pp. 216f. n. 23. 220. Literature: G. Petzke Die Traditionen inher Apdlonius (Brill, 1970) Leiden, von Tyana und das Neue Testament pp. 239ff.. 221. F. C. Conybeare Philostratus: Loeb The Life of Apollonius Library I (Heineman, 1948) p. vi. Classical London, 222. Ibid. and xii. pp. viif. 223. Grant Miracle p. 74. , 224. Literature: Charlesworth Pseudipigrapha p. 197. The below are to the English by Conybeare translation references JQR 11(1898) pp. 1-45. 67FF.. 225. Recently Hull Magic especially pp. 226. JQR 11(1898) The Legends of the pp. llf.; cf. L., Ginzberg Publication Society Jews 6 (Jewish of America, 1909-38) BEH 3 col. 1653. Philadelphia, p. 292; B. M. Metzger (Hinrichs, 227. The Testament 1922) Leipzig, of Solomon pp. 108f.. 228. JQR 11(1898) pp. 5f.. 229. Ibid. p. 6. 230. Ibid. p. 20 n. 2. for in 231. The writer's than Scripture range wider sources his familiarity that traditions showt with para. 103 he
11
378
103b has are now found in the magical papyri. . - "And if anyone write on fig leaves 'Lycurgos', taking away one letter it, at a time, and write reversing the letters, I retire at once. 'Lycurgos, ycurgos, kurgos, yrgos, gos, os".
Cf. PGM XlXa: 16ff. 1 XXVI: 115ff.; XLIII, See also Dieterich Abraxas. p. 185. 3:TR 11(1898) 232. Cf. Conybear6 p. 7. 233. Testament Introduction pp. 105-8; cf. A. -M Denis Aux Pseuddpigraphes Grecs D'Ancien Testament (Brill, Leiden, 1970) p. 67; and Charlesworth Pseudepigrapha p. 198. 234. Literature: Hennecke II, pp. 167f. and 259 (Acts of Peter), 390 (Acts of Andrew), 425f. (Acts of Thomas). 235. For example Bultmann History Dibelius pp. 221ff.; Tradition pp. 89,106. 236. See W. Schneemelcher in Hennecke II pp. 259-68. 237. See Ibid. pp. 272f.. 238. See chap. III Note avoidance nA5 below. of confrontation in Mk. 7: 25ff. and Acts of Thomas 62ff.. "An Unknown. Fragment 239. G. Quispel of the Acts of Andrew (Pap, N. 1)" VC 10(1956) Copt. Utrecht See also pp. 129-48. in Henneck-e II pp. 390-408, M. Hornschuh esp. 403ff.. 240. See Quispel in Ibid. pp. 145ff.. 241. Hornschuh in Ibid pp. 396f.. 242. In the Gregory is even the story of Tours version longer. See Quispel VC 10(1956) p. 138. 243. Ibid. p. 140. 244. Contrast 242ff. (see pp. 5oEand n. 86 above) wh ere PGM XIII: is considerable , difficulty there in getting the demon to speak. 245. See n. 24-Z above. Cf. Gregory 18 in text of Tours pari M. R. James The Apocryphal New Testament (Clarendon, oxford, 1924) p. 342. 246. See C. Bonner "The Violence Demons" HTR of Departing 37 (1944) pp. 334f f See below. also pA73 .. 247. Cf. Gregory 18 (James Apocryphal text of Tours par. drops dead. p. 342) where the soldier 248. Cf. Ibid.. 249. See A. F. J. Klijn Acts of Thomas (Brill, 1962) Leiden, p. 26; cf. G. Bornkamm in Hennecke II p. 440. 250. See p. 143 below. in Hennecke 251. See the footnotes II pp. 69ff.. 252. See Klijn Thomas pp. 267f.. 253. We have not dealt in the Acts of with one exorcism story it is an exorcism John (see Hennecke II pp. 235ff. ) for of a building. 254. Thus Bultmann to show that the cannot use these stbries Christain tradition oral early was dependent on Jewish and folk Hellenistic traditions for its stories and miracle (History We have shown that in relation to the motifs p. 240). Sol. and the NT Apocrypha Test. is the case. the opposite 255. Tiede Charismatic .
ii
379
256. Moses, Daniel, Jonah, Abraham and Jacob were all names incantations. See J. Gager Moses in Grecotaken up into (Abingdon, 1972); Nashville, Bonner Amulets' Roman Paganism 223f., 226: C. Bonner Goodenough Symbols II 171,272f.; pp. pp. "The Story Amulet" HTR 41(1948) of Jonah on a Magical pp. 31-7. 257. See Duling HTR (68(1979) p. 239. 258. Peter Brown JRS 61(1971) p. 1001 and The World of Late (Thames and Hudson, 1971) pp. 102ff.. London, Antiquity . Man' as late Brown puts the rise as the sixth of the 'Holy ("The Z. Jonathan Smith However agree we with century. in God's Christ Temple and the Magician" and His People ? for7-laget, (eds. ) J. Jervell Universitets: and W. A. Meeks be around the 1977) pp. 237f. ) that the date Oslo, should BC. second centurv
III I JESUS-THE-EXORCIST (the data) (Notes) for is in preparation This the latter part of chap. V where * be examining how the early Church to and we will responded interpreted Jesus as an exorcist. is well 2. The problem by the set out and discussed (examples), following B. H. 'Streeter The Four Gospels (Macmillan, 1924) pp. 150-360; London, W. G. Mmel (1973, ET, to the New Testament Revised Introduction edition 1975) pp. 38-80. On the history SCM, London, of the study of Problem the Synoptic Kdmmel Introduction see, for example, W. R. Farmer The Synoptic A Critical Problem: cf. pp. 45-52; (Macmillan, London and New York, 1964) chaps. I-III. Analysis 3. On which see (eg. ) H. G. Wood "The Priority of Mark" "The Priority G. M. Styler Exp. T 65(1953-4) pp. 17-19; of in The Birth C. F. D. Moule (Black, Mark" of the New Testament 1966) pp. 223-32. The 'Urmarkus' hypothesis London, "New Hypothesis (G. E. Lessing Concerning the Evangelists in Lessing's Human Historians" Theological Regarded as Merely by H. Chadwich (Stanford Writings and translated selected 1957) pp. 65-81 Stanford, University, proponents - recent Ommel by Introduction is now listed p. 61 n. 40)are discredited, see K6mmel Ibid. p. 62 and notes. generally The the priority Against of Mark see (eg. ) B. C. Butler (Cambridge originality University,. of St. Matthew 1951); by Problem, Cambridge, esp.. Farmer see the review F. W. Beare in JBL 64(1965) pp. 292-I.:. f Evidence 4. See K8mmel Ibid. p. 70; also R. W. Longstaf of (Scholars, in Mark? 1978); Missoula, Conflation "On Putting Q to the Test" M. D. Goulder and "Mark 16: 1-8 NTS 24(1977-8) J. M. Rist On the and Parallels" pp. 235-40; University, independence of Matthew and Mark (Cambridge 1978). Cambridge, 5. For literature-on 9 see F. Neirynck IDB Supp. p. 716; 'IQ in G. Bornkamm RGG3 II col. 766; also N. Turner Exp. T 80(1968-9) Neirynck Recent Thought" pp. 324-28; "The Symbol Q (=Quelle)" ETL 54(1978) pp. 119-25; "On Putting Q to the Test" NTS 24(1977-8) M. D. Goulder Introduction K&nel p. 63 n. 47; W. F. Howard "The pp. 218-34; IQ"' Exp. T 50(1938-9) origin pp. 379-80. of the Symbol 'IQ: A Re-examination" 6. See C. K. Barrett Exp. T 54(1942-3) "The Nature P. Vassiliadis of and Extent p. 320 and notes; Nov. T 20(1978) the Q Document" pp. 50-60 and notes and YAmmel Ibid. p. 67 and notes. 7. Barrett Ibid. Ibid. and Vassiliadis pp. 57ff.. Also 8. For the statistics Gospels see Streeter pp. 195f.. Extent the opening of "The Original of Q" in paragraph (ed. ) W. Sanday in the Synoptic Problem Studies oxford 1911) p. 185; cf. (oxford University, Oxford, F. C. Burkitt (Constable, for Sources the Life The Earliest of Jesus 1910) pp. 40ff.. London, 9. Streeter Gospels pp. 289f., and in Oxford pp. 186ff.; 1.
111
381
Study of the Synoptic A. M. Honore "A Statistical Problem" Nov. T 10(1968) pp. 134f.. 10. This means of course that any discussion of IQ's notion of'any particular point can only be of the most kind tentative and any reconstruction of a 'theology' of Q Nevertheless or the Q communityrests on poor foundations. kind See for S. Schulz of this abound. studies example (Theologischer Der Evangelisten Q: Die Spruchq! elle Verlage 1972); Zurich, D. Liahrmann Die Redaktion der Logienquelle (Neukirchener Verlag, Neukirchen 1969); - Vluyn, 1976), R. A. Edwards A Theology Philadelphia, of Q (Fortress, to a Theology of Q" JR 51(1971) and "An Approach pp. 247-69; &aittung "LOGOI J. M. Robinson SOPEON: On the of Q" in Leds. ) J. M. Robinson Through Early Christianity Trajectories (Fortress, 1971) pp. 71-113; Philadelphia, and H. Koester Criticism A Survey" and see R. D. Worden "Redaction of Q: JBL 94(1975) and notes. pp. 532-46 between 11. On the relationshiD Mark and Q see Xdmmel Introduction p. 70 and notes. is no literary dependence 12. That there see (eg. ) Kdmmel "St. Mark's Knowledge Ibid. B. H. Streeter p. 64; and use That*Luke of Q" Oxford pp. 165-83. used Matthew see the (on the by K&=el literature Ibid. cited D. 64 and n. 48; 'Griesbach Hypothesis' and E. V. McKnight see eg. C. H. Talbert "Can the Griesbach be Falsified" Hypothesis JRL 91(1972) "Has the Conflation?; Longstaff G. W. Buchanan pp. 338-68; Been Falsified? " JBL 93(1974) Hypothesis Griesbach (eds. ) B. Orchard and T. R. W. Longstaff pp. 550-72; (Cambridge University, J. J. Griesbach London and New York, 1978); H. P. West "A Primitive Version of Luke in the NTS (1967-8) Composition of Matthew" a' pp. 75-95 suggests for Luke and Matthew version of Luke as a source primitive (p. 75). (SP. CK, Lonaon, Criticism? What is Redaction 13. See N. Perrin "The 'Redaktionsgeschichtlich' R. H. Stein 1970); Seam (M4: 2lf*. )" ZNW 61(1970) investigation of a Markan for "The Ascertaining Methodology 70-94; Proper a and pp. Nov. T 13(1971) History" Markan Redaction pp. 181-98. (Oxford University', Horae Synopticae 14. Sir John Hawkins 1909). Oxford, Notes, Critical Usage. an the 15. "Markan and Exegetical, 26(1925) JTS 25(1924) pp-12-201 Second Gospel" pp. 377-85; 225-40,337-46. 145-56i by some scholars broken is being New ground 16.. HSE pp. 12f.. for "A Identifying Method O. W. Walker see particularly " 76-93. CBQ 39(1977) Passages pp. Redactional ... I (Herder, 17. Literature: R. Pesch Das Markusevangelium 1976) pp. 247ff.; H. ScWdrmann Das Lukas Freiburg, cf. 1969) p. 245. In the Freiburg, I (Herder, Evangelium. that have those I are texts points underlined parallel in the ensuing*discussion. important (See also p. 333 below where I Magic pp. 137f. 18. Hull is wrong). Hull that demonstrate
111
382
Stories" 19. H. J. Held "Matthew as Interpreter of the Miracle (eds. ) G. Bornkamm (et al. ) in Tradition and Interpretation (19 1963) pp. 166ff.. ET, SCM, London, , 20. J. H. Moulton and W. F. Howard A Grammar of New Testament (T &T Clark, Edinburgh, 1970) p. 464; see n. 173 Greek II below. 21. See p. 310 below. 22. H. Hanse TDNT II p. 819. 23. Ibid. 10: 20,21. 1 Cor. 8: 4-7; See also J. D. G. Dunn Jesus 24. Zf. (SCM, London, 1975) pp. 260f.. and the Spirit "The Holy Spirit 25. See also, G. W. H. Lampe IDB Il pp. 632ff.; ) (act. in in St. Luke" Studies the Gospel in the Writings of (Blackwell, D. E. Nineham Oxford, 1967) pp. 159-200; J. D, G', Dunn DNTT III pp. 698ff.. 26. On 4EXttv i-Paul to Christ and in relation see H. Hanse TDNT II pp. 819f.. 27. Mk. 1: 23/Lk. 4: 33; Mk. 1: 26/Lk. 4: 35; Mk. 5: 7/Lk. 8: 27; 9: 1 (cf. Style H. J. Cadbury Mk. 5: 13/Lk. 8: 33; Mk. 6i7/Lk. and (1920, 1969) p. 190. Kraus Reprint, New York, method Literary is described 36; cf. v. 35; in 6: 18 the 'unclean 28.4: spirit' 8: 29; cf. just described people; as a demon; as troubling 11: 24; cf. V. 26. 36; 8: 29; 9: 42. 29.6: 30. Schrmann Lukas I p. 247. (Vandenhoeck des Markus 31. E. Lohmeyer Das Evangelium und 1967) p. 36. that Go"ttingen, It is also noticeable Ruprecht, Ouv itself by least Luke - Acts. occurs oftenin at (The Johannine Mk. =7 times, Lk. -Acts=41 times. Mtt. =7 times, has it even more frequently; Jn. =15 times and material Rv. =53 times). (1979) p. 211. This view is taken 33. SB 11 p. 157; Bauer London,. by Plummer Luke p. 133; J. M. Creed Luke (Macmillan, kanson 70; London, 1930) p. Luke (Hodder and Stoughton, W. 1930) p. 45. (1979) p. 212; see also Lidden 34. Bauer and Scott p. 466. (1979) p. 211. 35. Liddell and Scott p. 465; Bauer (1979) p. 212. 36. Liddell and Scott p. 466; *Bauer 37. See p. la i below. 38. N. Turner Greek III A Grammar of New Testament'. 1963) p. 259; M. J. Harris (T &T Clark, DNTT III Edinburgh, P. 1180. (Mtt. =113 times, times, 39.127 Acts=114 Mk. =47 times, times times). Paul=95 40. Light p. 256 n. l. , 41. Cadbury Style p. 183. in Bauer. 42. See articles here language On the 'medical' 43. Cadbury Style pp. 183f.. Recent and hisLexical notes on Luke - Acts: II. pAl see Ibid. 46(1926) for Language" JBL medical pp. 190-209. arguments (Mohr, Tabingen, Das Lukasevangelium 44. E. Klostermann 1929) p. 67.
111
383
(passim); 105bi 45. Cf. Test. Sol. b. Hull b. Kid 29b. 46. Cadbury Style D. 93. 47. See p. jubelow. 48. Turner Grammar III Luke p. 193. p. 52; Marshall 12: 83; 49. Eg. P. Oxy. 532: , 17; 1673: 20; Mk. 8: 11; 9:, 14,16; 24: 15); Acts 6: 9; 9: 29; see further Liddell Lk. 22: 23 (perhaps and Bauer. and Scott 50. Liddell and Bauer. and Scott 51. Cf. Marshall Luke p. 193. 52. Ibid. p. 194. 53. DNTT III pp. 112f.,. ee Bauer Harris (in Luke only at 7: 1) is not used by Luke as a 54. 'Axo 'report'. Creed Luke p. 71. in Pesch Markus. I p. 128. 55. See literature cited (Hodder and Locality 56. R. H. Lightfoot and Doctrine 1938) p. 112; G. H. Boobyer "Galilee London, Stoughton, and in St. Mark's Gospel" BJRL 35(1952-3) Galileans ppi. 334-48; Before You Into Galilee" JTS 5(1954) C. F. Evans "I Will'Go The New Testament: N. Perrin An Introduction pp. 3-18; (Harcourt 1974) pp. 150f.; Brace Jovanovich, New York, (1959, ET, Abingdon, W. Marxsen Mark the Evangelist dans 1969) pp. 54ff.; J. -M. van Cangh I'La Galilee Nashville, de Marc un lieu theologiquell RB 79(1972) 114vangile (Vandenhoeck Galila'a & 59-72; Jerusal-em Lohmeyer E. und pp. 1936) p. 26. Gottingen, Ruprecht,
Mark (Cambridge University, Cambridge, 57. C. E. B. Cranfield 1966) p. 72; R. P. Martin Mark: Evangelist and Theologian Exeter, *1972) pp. 112 ff. '(Paternoster, and notes; C. F. Evans The Beginning of the Gospel (SPCK, London, 1968) pp. 46ff. On the number of people leav ing 58. Martin Mark pp. lllff.. the synagogue see Metzger Commentary p. 75. Cf. T. A. Burkill (Cornell New York, 1963) Revelation University, Mysterious p. 34. 59. Robinson Problem chap. 3. 60. R. H. Lightfoot The Gospel Message of Mark (oxford 1950) p. 21. Oxford, University, 61. Cranfield Mark p-384: 39; Dunn Jesus pp. 76ff.. 62. Cf. 2: llf.; 63. Dunn Jesus p. 79; Pesch Markus. I pp. 117f.. 64. A. M. Ambrozic "New Teaching with Power, (Mk. 1: 27)" in Word ) (Regis (ed. College Press, Willowdale, J. Plevnik SDirit and 1975)*p. 114. Ontario, 65. Cf. Eitrem Notes p. 8. Also Ambrozic Ibid., though I am not in in is that the he that aroused saying amazement right sure the witnesses and mightly of Jesus' teaching works is a theme "dear to Mark's heart". K. Kertelge Die Wunder Jesu im 66. Pesch Markus. I p. 120f.; Rsel, Manchen, 1970) p. 50. Markusevangelium'(Y,
67. K. L. Schmidt Der Rahmen der Geschichte Jesu , 1964) p. 50; Darmstadt, (Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, is confident that Mark D. 175 (though Taylor on p. 171 Taylor in tradition). Mark's Cf. Kertelge this was pericope of all *Wunder pp. 150f. and n. 58.
111
384
68. See Schweizer Mark p. 50. 69. That they are from Mark's hand see, for example, Kertelge Wunder p. 50. 70. Taylor "Towards Mark p. 91; P. J. Achtemeier the Isolation Miracle JBL 89(1970) Catenae" of Pre-Markan ZNW 61(1970) Stein pp. 265-91; p. 81 n. 38. 71. Of the considerable is literature the following on this in Word pp. 115ff. Ambrozic some of the more important. 1 'Authority"' D. Daube "A New Teaching in The New with (Athlone, Judaism 1956) Testament London, and Rabbinic lfoav-c'o 205-16; "The in A. Meaning W. Argyle of pp. (See also Pesch Markus-I Exp. T 80(1968-9) Mk. 1: 22,27" p. 343. p. 128). 6: 6; 13: 10; Jn. 6: 591 18: 20. 72. Mtt. 4: 23; Mk. 6: 2; Lk. 4: 15,31; Life J. -B. Frey Corpus Philo of Moses 11: 39(216); Iudiacarum II, Schdrer Inscriptionum no. 1404 pp. 332-5; I Hengel Judaism II pp. 424,448(a-nd History n. 164,453; pp. 82f.. 445. 73. Schrer II pp. 424f., History 74. Jeremias Jerusalem chap. 10. 75. Ilk goo-req in Mark 1: 22,2711 JTS 39(1938) pp. 45-59. 76. Exp. T 80 (1968-9) p. 343. in Word pp. 115f.. 77. Ambrozic 78. Ibid. pp. 116ff.. Fe-eK. "Idiosyncracie's'of in their 79. Grobel the Syn6ptists E. Best JBL 59(1940) Pericope-Introductions" pp. 405-10; (Cambridge 1963) Cambridge, Temptation University, and Passion 7NW 61(1970) pp. 70f. p. 63; Stein and notes. So. on 10: 24 see Pesch Markus. I p. 143 (esp. pp. 150ff. );. on below. 10: 32 see p-197 81. Mk. 1: 22/Lk. 4: 32; Mk. 6: 2/Mtt. 13: 54/Lk. 4: 22; Mk. 10: 26/ 22: 33; (Mk. 12: 34/ mtt. 19: 25; Mk. 11: 18/Lk. 19: 48; Mtt. 7: 28f.; Mtt. '22: 46/Lk. 20: 40). Cf. Bornkamm Jesus p. 144; Loos Miracles p. 129; Dunn Jesus p. 381 n. 42. Dunn Jesus pp. 76f.. 82. Mk. 10: 52, cf. 5: 26; 7: 16; 2: 12Mtt. 9.8/Lk. 83. Mk. 1: 27/Lk. 4: 36; 8: 34, 8: 27/Lk. 8: 25 (Mk. *5: 14,17/Mtt. 8: 33,34)/Lk. Mk. 4: 41/Mtt. 9: 26/Lk. 8: 56; Mk. 6: 51; 35,37; Mtt. 9: 8; Mk. 5: 20,42/Mtt. 33; 12: 23/Lk. 11: 141 Lk. 5: 9; 7: 16. 15: 31,9: 7: 37/Mtt. 84. E. Peterson G8ttingen, Eis Theos (Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1926) pp. 183-222i Pesch Markus. 1 p. 124. 3: 7-12; 6: 513--56. on-the'sammelberichte 32-34; 85.1: see SJT-14(1961) H. Sawyer "The Markan Framework" pp. 279-94. 86. Contrast Stein Nov. T 13('1971) a p. 197 who'considersit See also Taylor Mark p. 175. Markan term. Jesu in W*ens 87. See R. Pesch "Ein vollmachtigen (Mk. 1: 21-34,35-39)" Kapharnahum. BL 9(1968) p. 118; also Kertelge Wunder pp. 51 and 56. 88. Hawkins Horae Synopticae p. 13; HSE p. 21. 89. Hawkins, Ibid. "Arnerkungen. zur p. 12; E. Schweizer des Markus" Best Nov. T. Supp. -611962) Theblogie pp. 37f.; Stein ZNW` 61(1970)p. 73; Nov. T 13(1971) Temptation pp. 71f.;
111
385
in the Maikan Style p. 197; ESE p. 18; E. J. Pryke Redactional (Cambridge Gospel University# 1978) p. 136. Cambridge, 90. Lohmeyer Galilga Locality p. 26; Lightfoot p. 112; Marxsen Mark pp. 4f.; see also n. 56 above. 91. Pryke Style pp. 115ff.. 92. See n. 87 above. 93. Also Kertelge Wunder p. 56; and Schweizer Nov. T Supp. 6(1962) 22. p. 38. See also above onl: 94. Die des Cf. J. Weiss Schriften Neuen Testaments I . (Vandenhoeck G8ttingen, 1917) p. 85. and Ruprecht, "Some Cases of Possession"/? 95. See G. A. Chadwick 1892) p. 275. 96. Eg. 1 Sam. 16: 16,23; 18: 101 Philostratus Life IV: 201 Mk. 9: 22. 97. See p. 110 above. 98. See Bauer, Liddell Moulton and Scott, and Milligan and W. Grundmann TDNT III p. 898. 99. Grundmann TDNT III p. 898. 100. Ibid. p. 899. 101. Ibid. 102. Lucian 16, cf. 31; Disowned 7; Philostratus Philops Life 111: 38; b. Pes 112b-113a. IV: 20; cf. 103. Hull Matthew Magic pp. 128ff.; Held in Tradition pp. 172ff.. is not simply because they reticent about the exorcism stories to... (as but I Hull thinks) try as are exorcism stories show in is so dominated by his Christological chap. V Matthew he alters that Mark to enhance the reputation of objectives Jesus. 104, See Grundmann TDNT III-p. 401. 898f.; SIp. 105. Cf. Josh. 22: 24; Jud. 11: 12; IK. 17t; Taylor Mark p. 174; John (SPCK, London, C. K. Barrett 1978) p. 191; BaueP7-a4". in the way of Ebstein's that While nothing stands suggestion the plural to those used by the demon refers around Jesus at (W. Ebstein Die Medizin im Neuen Testament the time und im (Enke, Stuttgart, Talmud 1903) p. 60) neither is there anything his notion. in view of the context to support In fact Jesus confronting the demoniac is no need to see the - there demon's words referring to anything than this other confrontation.
106. W. Wrede The Messianic (1901, ET, Clarke, Secret Cambridge, 1971) p. 33 (f) . 107. A. Fridrichsen "The Conflict of Jesus with the Unclean Theology, 22(1931) p. 125 my emphasis. Spirits" 108. Miracle p. 112.
109. See also 0. Bauernfeind Die Worte (Kohlhammer, 1927) pp. 13ff.; Stuttgart, Magic; p. 78; Hull see also below. 110. Fridrichsen Miracle pp. 12f.. 111. Burkill Revelation p. 76 112. Cf. Ibid. pz75. 113. In Worte. der Da"monen Burkill cf. Revelaticn
114. Cf. Taylor Mark p. 174. 115. Further SB II p. 401; cf. F. Blass (et al. ) referencesin (University A Greek Grammar of the New Testament of Chicago,
111
386
(Marshall
1970)
Morgan and
p. 382.
118.. Ibid. followed by Pesch Markus I p. 122 n. 19. pp. 6ff., 119. Reveiation p. 77 and n. 14. 120. Cf. Immut. 133-9. 121. H. H. Schaeder TDNT--IV-pA74-. .... .... .... .. [SCM, London, 122. ' See B. Lindars-ITFW, Testament Apol6gi--tic 19611 pp. 194ff. 1 and. SB. Z p. 92.. 123. 'K. H. Ren4storf DNTT Ir p. 333'. ' 124.. Schaeder TDNT IV p. 8741. cf. Acts-2. -22'1'3. - .6 *etc.. 125. For the Semitic background of'*from'Nazaket10 see Edinbu. rgho 19121 pp. 16f.. W.C. Allen Matthew (T &T Clarkf 126. OnkrrAiArat see B. C. Rahn in DNTT I pp. 462'ff, j A. Oepke' in TDNT Z pp. 394ff.. SB IV p. 527 and IZ p. 2. 127. Cf. PGM IV: 3033ff..
128. See also. PGM IV: 1500,2984ff.; V: 103ff. j--V1II. -13j'Hellenistische Bauernfeind Worte p. llf. j R. Reitzenstein -(Teubner, 1963). p. 124..,. Leipzigp Wandererz'hl-ungen
129. From N. Turner A Grammar of New Testament Greek jv("r LT 19761 Clark, Edinburgh, p. 16. 130. Bultmann John p. 449 n. 4. 131. See'-O. Procksch TDNT I pp. 88f.; R. Bultmann John (1941, 1971) p. 448 n. 5; H. Seebass DNTT II Oxford, ET, Blackwell, p. 224.
des JudentLns 132. Cf. W. Bousset and H. Gressmann Die Religion (Mohr, Tdbingen, im St)a'thellenistischen 1966) p. 321 Zeitalter and n. 2; Seebas DNTT pp. 225f.; also Bultmann'John p. 449 cf. n. 5. 133. See Bultmann Ibid. 134. Cf. Judges 16: 17 (B) See F. Hahn The Titles of Jesus in (1963, ET, Lutterworth, Christology. London 1969) p. 233. 135. History p. 209 n. l. by Fitzmyer "Some Observations 136. Notably on the 'Genesis 6BQ 22(1960) The Apocryphon" p. 284 and W. H. Brownlee (Oxford University, Meaning of the Qamran Scro3ls for the Bible 1964) p. 210 n. 41. New York and Oxford, 137.1QM. 14: 10; 1QH. 9: 11; 1QHf. 4: 6; lQapGen. 20: 28-9. 138. Kee "The Terminology NTS Exorcism Stories" of Mark's 14(1967-8) pp. 232-46. 139. So Kee Ibid. pp. 242ff.. 140. Mtt. =7, Mk. =9, Lk. =12. 25; 3: 12; 4: 39; 8: 30,32,33; 9: 25; 10: 13,48. 141.1: 12; 8: 30,32,33; 142.3: 9: 25; 10: 13,48. 143. See Pryke Style pp. 10-23. 144. Wrede Secret Schweizer cf. pp. 34 (and n. 17) and 145ff.; Mark P. 55. 145. Schweizer Mark p. 52 and RSV. 146. See Bauer and Liddell and Scott. 15. 147. Cf. Mtt. 22: 34; Lucian Death of Peregrinus 148. Wrede Secret pp. 34ff.. 149. Cf. RSV.
111
387
150. Cf. Burkill Revelation p. 89 (and n. 6). 151. Ibid. p. 74. 152. Further examples in S. Eitrem Papyri Osloenses I (Norske Videnskops - Akademi, Oslo, 1925) pp. 76f. 1 cf. E. Rohde Psyche (1921, ET, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1925) p. 604; Eitrem Notespp. 30f.. 153. Cited by, Rohde Psyche pp. 603f.; see also A. Audollent (Luteciae 1904) 20: 51 Tabellae Parisiorum, Paris, Defixionum 25: 13; 32: 131 cf. Fridrichsen Miracles p. 112. 154. See Bauer; Blass Grammar par. 346; Kertelge Wander p. 54 and n. 87. (Cf. Rohde Ibid. p. 327 n. 107 - this word is"the 'binding' magically compels the whereby the spirit-raiser unseen to do his willll f. in Defixionum. 15: 24; cf. Wdnf cited 155. See esp. Audollent Rohde Psych p. 327 n. 107. 156. See p. 8o above. 157. See p-76 above. 158. SB 11 p. 2. 159. See further Bonner HTR 36(1943) pp. 47ff..
160. See p. 273 below (and Bonner HTR 37(1944) pp. 334-6 Der Besessene Pesch Markus I p. 29f.; 161. Literature: Von (Katholische 1972)1 Bibelwerk, Stuttgart, Gerasa "Observations Chapters' J. D. Kingsbury of on the 'Miracle Schdrmann 8-9" CB2 40(1978) Matthew pp. 559-73 and notes; Lukas I pp. 479f. Taylor Mark 162. For example, Lohmeyer Markus pp. 95-9; 1953) (Furche, Hamburg, G. Dehn Der Gottessohn pp. 277-85; Cranfield Mark pp. 177-80. pp. 110-114; I (Macmillan,. 163. C. G. Montefiore The_Synoptic 'Gospels 85ff.; 1909) p. 11; Dibelius F. C. Grant Traditionpp. London, Three Gospels IB 7, p. 712; W. Bundy Jesus and the First 1955) p. 243. Cambridge, (Mzvard University, Exp. T "The Gadarene Demoniac" 164. For example, M. M. Baird 31(1919-20) Religion Psychology, and p. 189; L. Weatherhead (Hodder and Stoughton, 1951) pp. 62ff. 1 London, Healing "The Gerasene A Diagnosis Demoniac: T. Hawthorn Exp. T 66(1954-5) pp. 79f. Revelation Worte pp. 34f.; 165. Bauernfeind Burkill p. 87; (1956, ET, SCM, Jesus'Promise to the Nations Jo Jeremias 1957) P. 30 n. 5; S. Cave "The obedience London, of Unclean NTS 11(1964-5) SDiritA' pp. 96fo. "Die Perikope Besessenern 16. H. Sahlin von geraser%ischen St. Th 18(1964) und der Plan des Markusevangeliuml pp. 159-72.
167. On our armroach to each story see Pjo7 above. Gospel is at 168. The problem of the structure of the first but see in NT scholarship, present being re-examined "The Structure Gospel J. D. Kingsbury of Matthew's especially CBQ 35(1973) pp. 451-74; and his concept of Salvation-History" (SPCK, his Matthew London, 1976). one of chapter cf. 169. Contrast thematic-structural Mark's deliberate use of 1: 21-28, see p. fit above. Introduction 170. See Perrin pp. 180f..
111
388
171. See Mtt. 9: 18/Mk. 1: 161 Mtt. 4: 21/Mk. 1: 191 Mtt. 20: 21/ Mk. 10: 37; Mtt. 26: 37/Mk. 14: 33; Mtt. 27: 21/Mk. 15: 11/Lk. 23: 18. 172. For example 'one' occurs 66 times in Mtt., 37 in Mk., 44 in Luke., 'two' occurs 40 times in Mtt., 19 in Mk., 28 'three' in Lk., occurs 12 times in Mtt. j 7 in Mk. j 10 in Lk.. 173. SB. I p. 530; F. Hauck TDNT III pp. 427f.; see
n. 20 above.
174. 175.,
176. 177. Loos 178. 179. 180. 181.
See H. Greeven TDNT VI pp. 763ff.. See 0. Betz TDNT IX pp. 292ff..
DNTT, III See M. J. Harris pp. 113ff.. Nineham Mark p. 1531 Schweizer As for Mark p. 1141 example Miracles p. 386. Mark pp. 280f. Mark p. 177. So Taylor and Cranfield in Tradition Held pp. 173f.. 322f.. 668ff. I TDNT , II W. Mundd. DNTT J. Schneider pp. pp. 1 "Ich bin ZTK 22(1912) A. Harnack gekommen" pp. 1-30;
H. Windisch p. 156.
Paulus
und
Christus
(Hinrichs,
Leipzig,
1934)
durch Taten des Christus 187. Cf. K. Bornh! luser Das Wirken (Bertelsmann, 1924) p. 81; X. G6tersloh, und Worte 1965) (Editions du Seuil, Etudes d'Evangile Paris, Le6n-Defour p. 165.
182. Hill Matthew p. 168. 183. See chap. V below. Cf. 1QS 4: 20f.. (Tyrolia, 184. Cf P. Gaechter Matthaus:: evangelium Innsbruckr 1963) P. 281. 185. "In one case the narrative the that follows provides answer, in the other it serves as a affirmative Held in Tradition, p. 174 confirmation"( 186.. Cf. Hull Magic p. 130.
p. 83. 191. There is evidence that was used in exorcism water (I. Goldziher "Wasser als Da'monen abwehrendes ARW Mittel" 13(1910) Bo"cher DAmonenfurcht pp. 20-2; pp. 195ff.; also see is mostly On the other hand, however, p. )Sabove). water habitatj a demon's with see I. E. S. Edwards Papyri connected b. HuL 105b.. B8cher Ibid. and notes; cf. p. xxii pp. 50ff.; 192. See p. t4- above; History Bultmann p. 224 and Dunn and Churchman 94(1980) Twelftree p. 212 and n. 10.
188. See p.; us below. 189. Held in Tradition of 190. Bornhauser Wirken
p. 174 n. 2.
193. See below on 6pKtjw194. For example Tobit 8: 3; Josephus Ant. 8: 46ff. 1 Life IV: 20; b. Meil. 17b. Philostratus 195. The addition Matthean of the characteristically ZrnPYq, (cf. literary 27) is HSE or merely grammatical p. a A4cej improvement. 196. See J. Schniewind TDNT I pp. 67f.; U. Becker and D. Mdller DNTT III pp. 46ff.. 197. See also Held in Tradition pp. 173f.. 198. Marshall Luke p. 335. 199. Pesch Besessene pp. 57-64. 200. See Bauer p. 613; cf. Marshall Luke, p. 338. 201. Cf. B8cher Christus p. 29.
111 202. J. Jeremias TDNT j-. 823. 203. Cf. SB III 204. See Marshall Luke 205. W. Foerster TDNT 206. That "the people (Marshall Luke p. 341)
389
I pp. 9f.; DNTT II p. 205. H. Bietenhard See also p. 35zbelow. p. 340. VII p. 990. give a peremptory command to depart" : EjPwr,4w (Lk. 8: 37) is is doubtful than Trwpoix0etv (Mk. 5: 17). See the certainly no stronger Bauer; H. Scho"nweiss DNTT 11 pp. 879f. 1 relevant articlesin (nerdmannss synonyms of the New Testament cf. R. C. Trench 1953) pp. 144f.. Grand Rapids, 207. See Liddell and Scott. 208. Taylor P. J. Achtemeier JBL 89(1970) Mark pp. 94f.. ZNW 61(1970) R. H. Stein p. 81 n. 36; Kertelge pp. 275f.; Wunder pp. 112f.. Taylor Mark p. 299; Pesch 209. Bultmann History pp. 56,60; Ibid. Mark p. 123; Kertelge Markus. I p. S; Schweizer pp. 122 n. 488, p. 130. 210. Cf. Best Temptation p. 75. 211. Taylor Mark p. 299. in 212. So also R. H. Lightfoot History and Interpretation (Hodder and Stoughton,, 1935) p. 186. the Gospels London, 213. Cf. Perrin Introduction pp. 152f.. 214. For examole Montefiore I p. 11; Dibelius Gospels Exorcism Tradition p. 88; Bundy Jesus p. 243; D. L. Bartlett 1972) Yale, in the Gospel of Mark (Ph. D Thesis, Stories pp. 136ff.. 215. Ibid. 216. ee Kertelge Wunder p. 52. 217. See for example Dibelius Tradition p. 89. (Olms, 218. R. A. Lipsius Acta Apostolorum. Apocypha_I 1959) p. 59 line 6.1 Hildersheim, 219. b. Pes. 112b (see p. 73 above); Bultmann Jub. 10: 7ff.; History p. 224 and 422. 69a; cf. T. W. Davies Divination 220. See also b. Gitt. Magic, Among the Hebrews and Their Neighbours and Demonology (Clark, 1897) p. 104. London, Leipzic, and Spirgatis, 221. Devils II p. xxxv. 222. Lectures of on the Origin and Growth of the Conception (ET, Williams 1892) London, God. and Norgate, 1q2- above. Bultmann History p. 225; cf. note pp. 88f.; 223. Tradition p. 87. ee 224. also Moulton and Milligan p. 371; Bauer pp. 467f.. 226. J. D. M. Derrett's that there suggestion are a number of ("Legend Demoniac: terms here The Gerasene and Event: military into Studia History Projection" An Inquest and Liturgical for 1978: Il p. 63 and nA is of little Biblica consequence ILA-q have wide and do not of themselves that a suggest varieties of meanings motif. military 227. Bartlett Exorcism p. 139. 75 228. M. D. Hooker "On Using the Wrong Tool" Theology in (1972) pp. 570-581; "Form Criticism Revisited" cEG. Stanton WANT pp. 13-27. 229. See Hooker Ibid.
III
390
230. Cf. J. F. Cragan "The Gerasene Demoniac" CBQ 30(1968) p. 527. 231. Lightfoot History p. 881 see also Cragan Ibid. 232. Burkill Revelation p. 92. 233. The following relies on Ibid. pp. 91f.. 234. Cf. Taylor Mark p. 258. 235. implied by Wrede Secret p. 141. 236. Revelation p. 92. 237. Echweizer Mark pp. 112f.. 238. Taylor Mark p. 84; Burkill has not properly Revelation and its repercussions. explored this possibility 239. Taylor Mark p. 2841 Lane Mark D. 186 n. 24. 240. See Bauer. 241. HSE P. 69. 242. ;ih-is word has been the centre of some debate, see Taylor It cannot be used as evidence for the Mark pp. 63f.. is good Palestinian origin of this verse for the construction 'Aramaism' Greek (H. St. J. Thackeray "An Unrecorded colloquial in Josephus" JTS 30(1929) pp. 361-70, esp. p. 370; cf. Black is characteristic Aramaia pp. 125f. ). In any ca se the locution , (See 79f. ). Pryke pylop. Mark. of 243. Lightfoot History, Schweizer extended note pp. 106f.; Nov. T Supp. 6(1962) pp. 35f.. 244. Schweizer Mark p. 112; cf. Taylor Mark p. 280. , , 245. Mk. =4; Lk. =2; Rev. =l. 246. See O. Michel TDNT IV p. 679; (C. J. Hemer DNTT I p. 264. ) 247. See above on 1: 21-28. 248. Ibid. 249. For example Philostratus Life IV: 20. 250. Bauernfeind Worte p. 24; Cf. Burkill Revelation p. 88. 251. See last note. 252. Imut. 138; cf. Bauernfeind. Worte p. 6. 253. See on Mk. 1: 24 above.
254. G. Dehn Gottessohn; E. Schweizer TDNT VIII pp. 377f.; Kee Communit pp. 121ff.. 255. See also PGM XII: 63f, 72; (cf. Test. Sol where the title is used. However see pp. 85 above). Moulton and Milligan. 256. G. Bertram TDNT VIII p. 620; see also Hahn Titles pp. 291f.. 257. See pp. =Wabove. 258. Cf. the use of Solomon's name in Ant. 8: 45ff.. 259. Revelation pp. 89f.. 260. ,Ibid. p. 90. 261. 'Zoos Miracles pp. 419ff.. 262. Revelation p. 90. Psychology 263. Langton 157; Weatherhead Essentials pp. 28f., p. 65.0 264. See- p3lanims6eboye. See also PGM 1: 162; IV: 3037; Deissmann Light p. 257 and n. 8; LKlostemann cf.
(Mohr, Das Markusevangelium HTR (36(1943) pp. 44f.. 265. See p. jo above. 266., On the Trial of Jesus Tdbingen, 1950) p. 491 Bonner
(Gruyter,
Berlin,
1961)
p. 129.
111
391
267. Ibid. He cites Josephui BJ III: 233t 289 and 458,485. 268. Promise p. 31 n. 5. H. Prei'Ek-oerTDNT IV P. 68 - "In the imperial period a Roman legion of about 6,000 men consisted " on foot.... 269. A. R. Johnson The One and the Many (University of Wales 1942) pp. 29f. and notesl Press Board, Cardiff, cf. Klostermann Mattha"us, pJ13; Hull Magic p. 103.
270. See n. 220 above, Markus,. p. 49. and also Klostermann 271. Taylor Mark p. 282; W. Foerster TDNT II pp. 6f. 1 B6cher , 20ff.. Christus pp.
interpretations 272. On various of the stampede of the pigs pp. 39off.. see Loos Miracles 273. H. Anderson Mark (Oliphants, London, 1976) p. 146. 274. Schweizer Mark p. 112. 275. Taylor Mark p. 283. 276. Pesdh Markus I P. 292. 277. History p. 210. 278. Mark p. 112, though Schweizer does not think that there here. are two stories 279. Literature: Pesch Markus I p. 391. 280. on our approach to each story see poolabove. 281. Hill Matthew p. 253; cf. Acta. 10. by T. W. Manson The Sayings of 282. Gospels p. 29*0, followed , Jesus (SCM, London, 1949) p. 200. Some take it that Matthew here uses Q (see McNeile Matthew p. 229). 283. Tradition p. 261 n. l. 284. Ueld in Tradition p. 198 noting Taylor Mark p. 347 with to Mtt. 9: 13; 12: 5-7,11-12 p. 61. and Bultmann History reference 285. HSE p. 61. 286. Ea-wkinls Horae Synopticae p. 7; Allen Matthew p. lxxxvi; , 61; Turner Grammar IV p. 43. HSE p. 287. HSE p. 61. 288. Ibid. p. 62. 289. Mtt. =11, Mk. =2, Lk. =2, but Jn. =17. f.. According 290. Allen Matthew pp. lxxxvi to a Matthean d'1-qro0-s is added (HSE p. 61. ). characteristic 291. Metzger Commentary p. 95. 292. Bauer p. 757. 293. The Origins to St. Matthew of the Gospel According (Clarendon, 1946) p. 132. oxford, 294. Cf. Argyle Matthew p. 119. 295. Kilpatrick Matthew p. 133. 296. Cf. Ommel Introduction p. 119. III 297. See Smith arties also Schdrer History pp. 79f.; p. 545ff.. 298. H. B. Green The Gospel According to Matthew (Oxford 1975) p. 146. oxford, University, 299. Hawkins Horae Synopticae p. 5; HSE p. 61; Turner GrammarIV p. 43. 300. HSE p. 62. 301. Mtt. =54, Mk. =23, Lk. =33, Jn. =70. 302. HSE p. 62. in Matthew's Use of 303. , See J. M. Gibbs "Purpose and Pattern 'Son of David"' NTS 10(1963-4) the Title pp. 446-64; Kingsbury
111
392
pp. 99f. and notes. . p. 198, following
Structure
304. Held in Tradition Bultmann History . 38. (W. (Buchhandlung Bussmann, Sm_optische Studien des p. Waisenhauses, Hal3e, 1925) I pp. 49-52, thinks the whole that in Ur-Markus ) pericope was lacking and was added later. 305. See also Klostermann Matthcqus. p. 133. 306. HSE P. 62. 307. Yb-icf. p. 61. 308. See n. 290 above. 309. Held in Tradition p. 200. 310. Turner "'Ev )czivo Grammar IV p. 32. See also J. Jeremias ZNW 42(1949) pp. 214-17 311. So also Argyle "The Matthew p. 119; T. A. Burkill Development Historical of the Story of the Syrophoenician Nov. T 9(1967) Woman (Mark 7: 24-31)" p. 177. (1973, ET, SECK# London, 312. Matthew 1976) p. 330; cf. Filson Matthew p. 179; Green Matthew pp. 146f.. (See also (Ka"sel, Miffichen, 1964) pp. 21-51. 313. "The Title lKyrios' in Matthewli Gospel" J. D. Kingsbury JBL 94(1975) pp. 246-55). 314. Kingsburylbid. p. 248. 315. on the text-critical questions see, Ibid pp. 252f. ' n. 31. 316. Ibid. pp. 252f. * 317. Mtt. =11, Mk. =4, Lk. =4, in. =O. 318. G. H. Box "The Gospel Narratives of the Nativity... McNeile Matthew Matthew ZNW 6(1905) pp. 6f.; p. 85; cf. Allen New Testament I (Paternoster, Foundations p. 5; R. P. Martin 1975) p. 226. Exeter, "The Therapeutic 319. See D. C. Duling Son of David: An Element Christological Apologetic" in Matthew's NTS 24(1977-8) (cf. 5.3.3. Gibbs NTS 10(1963-4) cf. pp. 446-64 pp. 392-410; (d) below). 320. H. Greeven TDNT VI p. 763. 321. See p-170 above. 322. Schweizer Matthew p. 330. 323. Creed Luke p. lxi. in Beginnings 324. F. C. Burkitt II p. 117; J. Jeremias "Peribopen-Umstellungen bei Lukas? " NTS 4(1957-8) pp. 115-9; (Paternoster, Exeter, Marshall Luke: Historian. and Theologian 1970) p. 65; Creed Luke pp. lx f.; J. Drury Tradition and (DLT, London, 1976) pp. 96f.. in Luke's Gospel Design 325. Nineham Mark p. 197. 326. Drury Design p. 98. 327. Ibid. 328. Cf. Jeremias Promise pp. 28f. and notes. 329. on the historicity of such a mission see Taylor'Mark 33. 197f.; Promise 633-36; Mark 7eremias Nineham p. pp. pp. "A Textual 330. C. H. Turner Commentary on Mark I" JTS , 29(1926-7) Mark p. 348. p. 152; Nineham Mark p. 197; Taylor 331. Anderson Schweizer Mark pp. 189f.; Mark p. 151; Burkill Woman: The Nov. T 9(1967) p. 173; and "The Syrophoenician ZNW 57(1966) Congruence of Mark 7: 24-31" p. 35.
111
393
332. See Bultmann History Best Temptation pp. 38,641 p. 791 Pesch Markus. *I p. 61; Kertelge Wunder p. 154. 333. See Marxsen Mark p. 69 and n-55. The point is not altered (ZNW 57(1966) pp. 35ff. ) however, even if Burkill's criticism is correct view that Mark takes up geographical of Marxsen's from supplementing data and refrains ite for it is the internal that is impor-. evidence of this particular pericope tant here. 334. See Stein ZNW 61(1970) p. 78 and n. 29 Cf. Wrede Secret p. 36. 335. ESE p. 18. BiFei'r6t; 336. Wunder p. 51 n. 581 cf. s see Kertelge ESE p. 68. 337. Cf. Turner Grammar IV p. 28. 338. Blass Grammar par. 111: 3. 339. Back Aramaic Turner Grammar IV p. l; cf. pp. 100f.; Taylor Mark p. 60. 340. See pJ11above. , 341. Turner JTS 26(1925) pp. 145 and 150; Turner Grammar IV into the New Testament Insights p. 26 and hi7-`Grammatical 1965) pp. 64-6. (T &T Clark, Edinburgh, 342. Jeremias Promise p. 33; Taylor Mark (see index); , Nineham Mark pp. 197f. 343. Nineham Ibid. 344. Pryke cites wpa-rav as a Markan redactional word (Style p. 137) but-ESE does not cite the word as significant of Mark's hand. 345. Jeremias Promise p. 29. 346. Cf. Taylor Mark p. 347. , 347. See n. 334 above. 348. Fiebig iddische Wundergeschicten p. 22.
Schiirmann Lukas I p. 568; Kertelge Wunder Literature: Pesch Markus II p p. 97f. ; J. Gnilka Das Evangelium pp. 174-9; (BeZ=inger, 1979) p. 45. II Zurich, Markus nach 350. On our approach to each pericope see p- 107 above. 351. Hawkins Horae Synopticae ESE p. 64 p. 149 n.; cf. for civovindicating Luke's preference 352. HSE p. 61. for these words in Mark is only 353. Support found in p 45, (W) 354. Rm. 10: 19, cf. Dt. 32: 31; Rm. 12: 19 and Heb. 10: 30, Dt. 32: 43; cf. Dt. 32; 35; Rm. 15: 10 and Heb. 1: 6, cf. Dt. 32: 5. Phil. 2: 15, cf. 355. Cf. 1QS. 10: 19-20 and Dt. 32: 35. See Lindars Apologetic p. 245 and n. 2; A. R. C. Leaney The Rule of Qumran and its (SCM, London, 1966) pp. 121,233 Meaning and 249. 8: 33; Eph. 3: 5; 356. For example Mtt. 16: 4/Mk. 8: 12; Acts like Phil. 2: 15; Heb. 3: 10. And although Mtt. 12: 42, a verse images is not an OT quotation, the Queen of the South, about used. of the OT are being 357. While it is possible that Luke used Matthew "The Argument (E. P. Sanders from Order and the Relationship it is Between Matthew and Luke" NTS 15 (1968-9) pp. 249-61) 349.
III they are independent generally agreed that Nov. T 10(1968). p. 1351 Kilimmel Introduction
358. For 28: 9-20; 17: 24-27; 27: 3-10,24-26,62-661 example Structure see Kingsbury pp. 21f..
394
(eg. see Honor6 p. 64).
359.
Cf.
Kingsbury
Ibid.
360. B. W. Bacon in Matthew Studies (Constable# Nineham Mark pp. 37 and 242. p. 238; 361. in Tradition See also Held p. 188
p. 22.
London,
1930)
362. Matthew also omits Mk. 5: 31; 8: 17f. '; 9: 38; see also J. D. Kingsbury The Parab les of Jesus in Matthew 13 (SPCK, , 1969) London, pAl and n. 68. 363. For example J. Schneider TDNT II p. 683, Mtt. -52, Mk. -5, Lk. =10; Jn. =l. 364. Held in Tradition pp. 226-8. 365. Ibid. 29 366. H. Schlier TDNT I p. 738; cf. H. Sch6nweiss DNTT II p. 859. 367. J. C. Fenton Matthew (Penguin, Earmondsworth, -.1963) p. 128. 368. See J. M. Ross "Epilectic or Moonstruck" BT 29(1978) pp. 126-8. 369. B. Citron "The Multitude in the Synoptic Gospels" SJT 7(1954) P. 410. 370. S. V. McCasland By the Finger of God '(Macmillan, New York, 1951) P. 114. 371. Hull Magic pp. 167f. n. 24. 372. Cf. Held in Tradition p. 230. 373. Ibid. 374. Ibid. p. 228. 375. on v. 21 in the texts see Metzger Commentary p. 43. 376. Cf. G. B. Caird Luke (Penguin, Harmondsworth, 1963) p. 134. having a symbolic on the 'mountain' significance as a place in the gospels - particularly of revelation Luke - see H. Conzelmann The Theology of Saint Luke (1957, ET, Faber, London, 1969) pp. 44f. and 57. 377. Grundmann in Marshall Luke pp. 390f.. 378. on vv. 40f. see above. on Luke's minor grammatical alterations see Cadbury Style p. B. 379. on-the Lukan improvements on grammar see Marshall Luke p. 392. 380. A Lukan word; Mtt. =4, Mk. =l, Lk. =12, Jn. =3; see also HSE iD.64. _81._See Luke p. 392. also Marshall 382. Bultmann, History p. 211; see also Schweizer Mark D. 187; Held in Tradition p. 187; Anderson Mark p. 229; Nineham Mark p. 242; Taylor Mark p. 396. To the contrary Loos Miracles p. 401. 383. Bultmann History p. 211. 384. Kertelge Wunder p. 52. 385. History p. 211. 386. Cf. Taylor Mark p. 400. 387. Ibid.
111
395
388. Black Approach (1946) p. 85 n. 3. 389. See also Lagrange Marc p. 2411 Plilmmer Luke p. 220; Swete Mark p. 200. 390. T. J. Weeden Mark-Traditons (Fortress, in Conflict 1971); Philadelphia, that see also his "The Heresy Necessitated Mark's Gospel" ZNW 59(1968) pp. 145-58. 391. Weeden Mark pp. 50f.. 392. C. J. A. Hickling "A Problem of Method in Gospel Research" RS 10(1974) p. 341. 59-3. See also Q. Quesnell's of Weeden in CBQ 35 review (1973) p. 125. 394. See Ibid. For a more thorough treatment of Weeden's Mark pp. 150ff., whole thesis see Martin 395. "The Blindness in Mark" JBL 80(1961) of the Disciples pp. 261-68. 396. "Die Christologie des Markusevangeliums" ZTK 58 (1961) pp. 154-83. 39 7. The Kingdom in Mark (Fortress, 1974). Philadelphia, , 398. E. Best "The Role of the Disciples in Mark" NTS 23 (1976-7) pp. 400f.. 399. Ibid. pp. 390 and 396, cf. p. 399. 400. See the table in Ibid. p. 386. 401. Ibid. p. 385. 402. Ibid. p. 387. 403. Ibid. p. 388. 404. See ESE pp. 18 and 58f.. 405. Some texts to 'fasting', Mark make reference see Taylor C p. 401 and Metzger entary p. 101. (IMark, p. 242) is inqorrect 406. Nineham in saying that the disciples "to cast out an evil in his name were unable spirit (my emphasis). (v. 18)" is not in view This form of exorcism (v. 29). here 407. On exorcism in the post-Apostolic Church see "Jesus Wm.W. Everts No Exorcist" Christ, BS 81(1924) pp. 355-62. 408. On 'inconsistency' as an indication of redaction see Stein ZNW 61(1970) pp. 78f.. 409. See HSE pp. 18 and 58f.. 410. On the scribes in Mark see M. J. Cook Mark's Treatment of Leaders Nov. T Supp. 51 (Brill, 1978) the Jewish Leiden, 1 pp. 83ff. 411. C. H. Turner Mark (SPCK, London, n. d. ) p. 43. 412. Swete Mark p. 195. 413. Nineham Mark p. 245. 414. Mark p. 396 and also Swete Mark p. 195. 415. Robinson, Problem, pp. 68-73. 416. Ibid. p. 69. 417. Robinson (Ibid. ) also draws attention to the association in 4: 40 of fear and numinous awe on the'part of the disciples being to lack of and 6: 49-52 - both attitudes attributed about Jesus. clarity 418. Jesus p. 76. 419. See p. 1q4 above.
111
396
420. See H. E. To"dt The Son of Man in the Svnontic Tradition (1963, -ET, SCM, London, 1965) p. 224 and E. K8semann ENTT P. 4o. 421.1 H. E. W. Turner's accept criterion of authenticity (Historicity (Mowbray, 1963) pp. 73ff. ) London, and the Gosoels that "where there is an overlap between the of interest Gospels but a marked difference Church, and early in the scale of treatment, we, can be reasonably sure historical (p. 74). that we are on firm ground" 422. In ancient Sabylon; an exorcisms p. 13 - see above 16; Philostratus Philops Lucian Life III: 38; IV: 20; (cf. Acts of Thomas Act 3: 31-33). 423. - See Eitrem Notes p. 27. 424. See also Ibid. 24-26; Deissmann Light p. 26; Lk. 11-. II pp. 59 and 85. p. 252 n. 2; Thompson Devils 425. Anderson Mark p. 231. 426. on the use of hands see D. Daube Rabbinic Judaism in DNTT 11 pp. 152f. '. pp. 224-46 and the bibliography , 427. Literature: Pesch Markus I pp. 220f.. ,. 428. on the overlap between Mark and Q here see Streeter Gospels pp. 187 and 211; L4hrmann Logienquelle p. 32; "The Overlaps E. P. Sanders of Mark and 9 and the Synoptic Problem" NTS 19(1972-3) Butler Matthew esp. p. 460; contrast the and Farmer Problem p. 252. on the extent*of pp. 8ff.; (Faber, 1957) London, overlap see F. C. Grant The Gospels Ibid.. and Sanders pp. 108f.; 429. -Hawkins Horae Synopticae Grammar IV p. 43. p. 8; Turner 430. Hawkins Ibid. Ibid. p. 7; Turner 431. occurs Jn. 10: 21; Lk. 8: 361 Mk. 1: 32; 5: 15, as follows: 16,18; 9: 32; 12: 22; 15: 22. Mtt. 4: 24; 8: 16,28,33; (Delachaux Saint Cf. P* Bonnard Matthieu & Niestl6, 1963) p. 179. NeuchAtel, 432. LXX has "recovery to the blind", RSV note. of sight cf. 433. See also S. McConnell in Matthew's Law and Proohecy (Th. D Thesis, 1969) pp. 154f.; Gospel Basel, R. H. Gundry (Brill, in Matthew's The Use of the Old Testament Gospel 1967) p.p. 208ff.. Leiden, 434. Mtt. =17, Mk. =5, and Lk. =B. 435. See n. 303 above. 436. See chaD. V below. 437.. Fuller Miracles the same about p. 25 n. l. He feels 9: 32-34. Mtt. 9: 27-31; 438. Ibid. z). 32. 439. bid. 440. Ibid. 441. For a test view see F. G. Downing case in defence of this "Towards the Rehabilitation of Q1' NTS 11(1964-5) pp. 169-87; also Honor6 Nov. T 10(1968) pp. 95-147, esp. p. 135. That Luke did use Matthew A. W. Argyle see for example; "Evidence for the View that St. Luke used St. Matthewls Gospel" JBL 83(1964) R. T. Simpson "The Major pp. 390-6;
111
397
Agreements of Matthew and Luke Against Mark" NTS 12(1966-7) (It 273-84. pp. to say that the may even be possible in Bultmann is probably exorcism has a pre-Q origin. right supposing that "the discussion ite presupposes an exorcism preceding to the tradition and no story original would be likely to begin with a reference to some activit of Jesus in quite general terms 11 (History p. 13)). 442. Cf. T. W. Manson Sayings pp. 82ff. 1 A. PolagF*ra$me0q-Q (Neijk; (Q is rchener, Neukirchen- Vluyn, 1979) pp. 50f.. (see sometimes said to contain only 'sayings' material "IQ' is Only What You Make it" Nov. T 3(1959) p. 29) Petrie but apart from Lk. 11: 14, it may also have contained Lk. 4: 2-13; 7: 1-10,18-23; 11: 29-32; see Kdmmel Introduction p. 68). 443.1 take it that Mtt. 12: 23b. is Matthean, see below. 444. Hill Matthew p. 215; cf. T. F. Glasson "Anti-Pharisaism in St. Matthew" JQR 51(1960-1) pp. 316-20; S. van Tilborg The Jewish Leaders in Matthew (Brill, 1972). Leiden, 445. See E. P. Sanders The Tendencies of the Synoptic (Cambridge University, Tradition Cambridge# 1969) pp. 188f.; see also Schulz. Q p. 204f. n. 206; and B. M. Metzger "Names for the Nameless in the New Testament. A Study in the Growth of Christian in Kyriakon: Tradition" Festschrift Johannes Quasten (eds. ) P. Granfield and J. A. Jungmann I (Aschendorff, 1970) pp. 79-99. MUnster Westfalenr 446. Mtt. 12: 24/Lk. 11: 15. 447. T. Schramm Der Markus-Stoff bie Lukas (Cambridge Cambridge, 1971) pp. 46f.. University, 448. on the precise Schulz wording of Q see Schramm Ibid.; Luke pp. 473f.; Polag Q pp. 50f. p. 205, Marshall and , 449. Cf. Klostermann Lukas. p. 127. 450. )V4)t-c-'canon' that inconsistencies Stein's to be due to the last redactor are more likely than being found in his tradition( ZNW 61(1970) pp. 78f. ). Contrast Marshall Luke p. 474. 451. On Mtt. 12: 28/Lk. 11: 20 see below. 452. See the literature cited by Marshall. Luke, pp. 476f.. 453. Marshall Ibid. p. 477. 454. Only once , in Q (Mtt. 24: 42/Lk. 12: 44) - following R. A. Edwards A Concordance to Q (Scholars, 1975). Missoula, Mtt. =2 (excluding Mtt. 24: 42), yet Lk. =14 (excluding Lk. 12: 44) and Acts =25 and Paul =12. 455. Lindars Apologetic p. 85. 456. Marshall Luke p. 516. 457. Bultmann ,Histry p. 14; Lahrmann. Logienquelle p. 34,T. W. Manson Sayings p. 87; Marshall 'Ibid. p. 479; Polag _Q 52f.. To the C. E. Carl-Ston pp. contrary, see with no evidence, Parables of the Tr12le Tradition (Fortress, Philadelphia, 1975) p. 69. 458. That Mark intends *t-nbfe-fQ'-ro0torefer 'family' to Jesus' from Mark's conclusion is evident than 'friends' rather to the pericope where his mother and brothers are mentioned (3: 31).
111
398
459. Taylor Mark p. 235. 460. See chap. V below. 461. See Bultmann History Tradition pp. 29f, - cf. Dibelius p. 47. 462. See p. PC above. 463. See Cook Leaders pp. 85ff.; J. C. Weber "Jesus' Opponents in the Gospel ;f Mark" JBR 34(1966) pp. 214-22. 464. See n. 445 above. 465. See chap. V below. 466. See Taylor Mark p. 239; Schweizer Mark pp. 83f. 1 Dibelius Tradition p. 237; 'Xertelge Wander p. 126 n. 5051 Best ZTK 58(1961) p. 16. Temptation p. 117; Schreiber 467. Taylor Mark p. 240; J. D. Crossan "Mark and the Relatives of Jesus" Nov. T 15(1973) p. 92. 468. See the discussion in Todt Son of Man pp. 118ff., 312-18. Further on this verse see, for example, Jeremias 35f.; Theology_1 pp. 11,14ff., K. Berger Die Amen-Worte 1970) p. 41; Pesch Markus. 1 pp. 216f. (Gruyter, Berlin, "A Note on the p. 92; J. G. Williams and notes; Crossan Ibid. 'Unforgivable Sin' Logion" NTS 12(1965-6) pp. 75-7. by some early 469. R. Scroggs ("The Exaltation of the Spirit JBL 84(1965) p. 361 here cites Johnson Mark Christians" p. 83. 470. Scroggs Ibid. for the position 471. That Mark, is responsible of vv. 31-35 Taylor'Mark see, for example, Schweizer Mark pp. 83f.; 96ff.; Stein p. 245; Crossan Nov. T 15(1973) pp. 85ff., Nov. T 13(1971) pp. 193f.. 472. Ibid. p. 113. 96. 473. Contrary Ibidp. to what Crossan thinks, 6: 1-6; 15: 40, 474. Contrary to Crossan (Ibid. p. 81) who cites 47 and 16: 1. 475. Ibid. p. 112. 476. Taylor Mark p. 235. 477. Cf. Mk. 3: 21 and'30 and p.. Zelbelow. 478. See Dunn Jesus pp. 49ff.. 479. See Carlston P rables p. 135 n. 30. 480. Temptation p. 13. 481. Deissmann Light p. 306 and n. 5, see also pp. 307ff.; and F. Buchsel TDNT II p. 60 esp. n. 3. 482. Cf. Gospel of Thomas 35 which also takes the house to be at risk. than the contents rather 483. P. JOUon in J. Jeremias The Parables of Jesus (1970, ET, SCM, London 1972) p. 197. 484. See Marshall Luke p. 477. 485. In fact Luke seems unlikely to have added the word for he takes up from Mcrk while it occurs 14 times in the material 5: 40; 6: 13; 9: 18t 28,38; (Mk. 1: 12,34,39,43; 3: 15,22,23; 11: 15; 12: 18) he only uses the word 5 times (from Mk. 3: 22; 9: 18,38; 11: 15 and 12: 8) and as far as we know he only once (Lk. 20: 21; cf. Mk. 12: 5). On added the word to his tradition the other hand while Matthew only drops the word a few times
111
399
(from Mk. 1: 12/Mtt. 4: 11 Mk. 1: 39/Mtt. 4: 231 Mk. 1: 43/Mtt. 8: 41 Mk. 7: 26/mtt. 15: 25; Mk. 9: 18/Mtt. 17: 16) he has a known for Ozpw"wr4w - see j! SE P. 62. predilection Z; Ftis 486. on the probable historicity story see n.441 above. 487. on it being a charge of magic see pp-Boqff. below. 489. The view of William Manson Luke p. 1381 cf. Bauer. 490. Plummer Luke p. 301. , 491. Ralph Marcus on Ant. 9: 19 in H. St. Z. Thackerary Josephus Loeb Classical Library VI (Heinemannj Londont, 1958) p. 12, note (a). 492. For most of what follows I am dependent on L. Gaston "Beelzebub" TZ 18(1962) pp. 247-55. 493.1QM. 12: i-, 21 1QS. 10: 13; 1QH. 3: 34. 494. E. Bickermann Der Gott-der Makkabaer (1937) esp. pp. 50ff., cited by Gaston Tz is(1962) p-252 mal. 495. Ezra 1: 2; 5: 11,12; 6: 9,10; 7: 12,21,23; Neh. 1: 4,5; 2: 4,20; 4: 34; 5: 231 Ps. 136: 26; Dan. 2: 18,19,37,44; Tob. 13: 11; 2 Mac. 15: 23. 496. LXX Ps. 95: 5; 1 Cor. 10: 20; cf. LXX Dt. 32: 17; Ps. 105: 37; Bar. 4: 7; Rev. 9: 20. 497. Gaston TZ 18(1962) p. 253. Gaston goes on to suggest that Zebul was used, 498. Ibid. , because the among the possible synonyms for heaven, probably knew a certain in the Beelzebub controversy Pharisees claim made over the temple (Ibid. 'p. 254). 499. on ol uIal Parables p. 18 n. 11. see Carlston , 'by God' is clear from 500. That Jewish'exorcistsdid operate (quoted p. 31 above).. PGM IV: 3019ff. Ammel 631 501. For example, Perrin W. G. Rediscovering p. (1956, ET#, SCM, London, 1957) Promise and Fulfilment pp. 105f.. 502. Luke pp. 160f.. Parables p. 18 also finds vv. Carlston , 20 incompatible. 19 and See also Schweizer Matthew p. 284. by Kln-e-l Promise 503. Bultmann, History p. 14, followed pp. 105f.. 504. Creed Luke p. 161. 505. For the literature and notes. see Dunn Jesus pp. 44ff. 506. Ibid. in 507. the Old Testament the term 'finger of God' is used the direct to identify activity of God. So in Ex. 31: 18 it is the finger of stone. of God that wrote on the tablets (See also Ex. 8: 19; Dt. 9: 10 and Ps. 8: 3). The activity of the Spirit the activity of God also indicated of God himself, _ falls in 11: 5 Ezekiel the Spirit on and of the Lord Ezekiel and he is addressed by the Lord. What is most interesting is that in Ez. 8: 1 it is the hand of the Lord that falls to-produce Thus here is an on Ezekiel a vision. instance are used synonymously. where 'hand' and 'Spirit' (See alsolCh. 28: 11-19. R. G. Hammerton-Kelly "A Note on Matthew 12: 28 par. Luke 11: 20" NTS" (1964-5) p. 168). Further, in the Old Testament the 'finger of of God' is a variation (Ibid. the 'hand of God' with no alteration in meaning. and Barrett Spirit p. 144 and notes. )
111
400
508. Recently Dunn Jesus pp. 44ff.. 509. See also SB II pp. 526ff.. 510. Blass Grammar par. 227: lf.; Moulton cf. and Turner Grammar III pp. 37f.. 511. E. , Stauffer TDNT II p. 348. 512. -N. Perrin The Kingdom of God in the Teaching of Jesus (SCM, London, 1963) chap. 10; and Rediscovering chap. 1; Jeremias Jesus Theology I par. 11; R. H. Hiers The Historical Gainesviller and the Kingdom of God (University of Florida, 1973) chap. 2. 513. OnZ'0jx(rrrsee Cf. Jeremias Ku'mmel Promise pp. 106-9. Ibid. P. 34. T1-4. G. Dalman The Words (1898, ET, T&T Clark, of Jesus 1902) p. 107. Jeremias Edinburgh, Ibid. pp. 103ff. 1 Barrett (1968, ET, Herder, Spirit New York, Jesus p. 1401 D. Flusser , 90; H. Baltenweiler "Wunder und Glaube im Neuen 1969) p. Testament" TZ 23(1967) pp. 243-8. 515. Jeremi7as Ibid. p. 14. 516. Literature: Jeremias I p. 68. Theology 517. Luke p. 170. in 518. ,See further Schuyler Brown Apostasy and Perseverance Rome, the Theology Institute# Biblical of Luke (Pontifical 1969) pp. 6ff. the Teachand Baumback inT. Rohde Rediscovering (1966, 1968) ing of the Evangelists ET, SCM, London, pp. 243f.. 519. Schulz p. 181. , orkwDxt: 520. '1Sc#j'Mtt. =52, Lk. Mtt. Mk. =62, =7, =57. : Mk. =5, Lk. =10; see also Ibid. is 521. Hawkins Horae Synopticae Schurmann Lukas. I p. 16; cf. p. 214 n. 198. 522. Cf. Klostermann Lukas p. 61. 523. Temptation Carlston, Parables p. 15; c. p. 135 and n. 30. 524. Best Ibid. p. 10. in Ibid. 525. Lohmeyer p. 4 and n. l. : 15; 8: 3.3. Mark does not use StAfloOS. 23,26; 526.1: 13,3: 527. Best Temptation p. 10. (SCM, London, 1963) 528. U. W. Mauser Christ in the Wilderness 32: 34; 33: 2. Ex. 14: 19; 23: 20,23; p. 101; see 1 Kings 19: 5,7; 529. Contrast Nineham Mark p. 63ff.. 530. See also H. P. Thompson "Called-Proved-Obedient: A Study in the Baptism Narratives and Luke" and Temptation of Matthew JTS 11(1960) pp. 1-12. 531. Literature: Jeremias Dunn Theology I pp. 43 and 103-5; Jesus pp. 55-60 and Marshall Luke p. 289. 532. On Luke's Style avoidance of repb-tition see Cadbury pp. 83-90. 533. Schrmann Lukas. I p. 410 n. 18. 534. HSE p. 79. 535. Cadbury Style pp. 142ff.. 536. Hawkins Horae Synopticae p. 16. 537. HSE p. 81; cf. Ibid. pp. 21 and 45. 538. Cf. Black Aramaic p. 109.
III
4ol
539. Hawkins Horae Synopticae Luke pp. 19 and 41; Marshall p. 291. 540. Also at 8: 2; 11: 26 (par. Mtt. 12: 45): Acts 19: 12,13,15t 16; Mark also does not use the phrase. Cf. Marshall Luke p. 291. 541. In the Gospels, Lk. =3; cf. Marshall Ibid. 542. Cf. Marshall Luke p. 290.. (Stein ZNWZl(1970) p. 78). 543. Cf. Creed Luke P. 106; W. Manson Luke pp. 78f. 1 Thompson Luke p. 123. 544. Cf. Polag Q p. 40. 545. Discussed in more detail in Schulz Q pp. 190f.. 546. R. T. France Jesus and the Old Testament (Tyndale, Londcnp 1971) p. 96. 547. Cf. A. E. Harvey Jesus on Trial (SPCK, London, 1976) p. 9 and n. 21. 548. Cf. G. N. Stanton "On the Christology of Q" in CSNT p. 30 and 32. Cf. Dunn Jesus pp. 60f.. 549. On the order of Csee. V. Taylor "The original Order of Q" in New Testament Essays (Epworth, London, 1970) pp. 95-118. 550. Held in Tradition p. 251. 551. Scharman-n (Lukas i p. 410 n. 18) thinks that Matthew is following his custom of abbreviating his source so that LK. 7: 21 would have been found in Q. But the signs of Lukan tip the balance in favour of this being a Lukan editing (cf. Marshall Luke pp. 290f. ). creation 552. Cf. Conzelmann Luke p. 191. 553. Dunn Jesus p. 6677 ' 554. Note Ibid. Cf. Bultmann History pp. 60ff. p. 126. 555. 231; Jeremias Pesch Theology I Markus. I p. -Literature: Schrmann Lukas. I pp. 498f.. The brief pp. 331f.; nature of discussion the following does not warrant including the texts. rather extensive 556. F. Hahn Mission in the New Testament (1963, ET, SCM, London, 1965) pp. 41-6 also Jeremias Theology I p. 231. 557. Hahn Mission pp. 41f.. 558. Schramm Markus-Stoff pp. 26-9 and Hahn Ibid. p. 41; F. W. Beare "The Mission of the Disciples an-d the Mission Charge: Matthew 10 and Parallels" JBL 80(1970) p. 2; Jeremias Theology I p. 231. 559. Hahn Mission pp. 42ff.. 560. Marshall Luke p. 412; see also T. W. Manson sayings p, 74. , 561. On the reading of Sv'o see esp. Metzger'Commentary and "Seventy or Seventy-Two Disc iples"'NTS pp. 150f.; 5(1958-9) pp. 299-3061 cf. also Beare JBL 89(1970) p. 1 n. l. 562. Sayings p. 73; cf. G. B. Caird "Uncomortable Words 11 Shake , off the Dust from your Feet (Mk. 6: 11) Exp. T 81(1969-70)' than any p. 41 - "The mission charge is better attested other part of the gospel record*. 563'. 'Beare'JBL 89(, 1970) p. 12. 564. 'Ibid. p. 13. 565. Bultmann'History Jeremias'Theology I p. 1451 contrast ' p. 233 Lhn. 566. *Mission p. 43; cf. Beare JBL 89(1970) p. 10; Bultmann'Ibid.
111
402
Exp. T 81(1969-70) p. 41.
567. Caird
568. P. Hoffmann der Logidnquelle Studien zur Theologie Winter, (Aschendorf, 1972), pp. 312-31. 569. Schulz p. 415. _QEaston Luke (T &T Clark, 1926) 570. See B. S. Edinburgh, p. 160. 571. Further 105ff.. Promise pp. 22ff., see Knmel i-p-. 572. Jeremias 232. Theology 573. See SB II p. 166. 574. See SB I p. 571; cf. Caird Exp. T 81(1969-70) p. 41. 575. Cf. Jeremias I p. 232 and n. l. Theology 576. MarshallILuke p. 413. 577. Cf. Jeremias I p. 95. Theology 578. Taylor Mark p. 318. 579. Ibid. 580. A relatively view is Hoffmann recent of this champion Lk. 10: 1 The key to this Logienquelle case is that pp. 248ff.. being is Lukan. But this on redaction may have no bearing have drawn from one of his Lk. 10: 17-19 which Luke could 10: 17-20 fits Luke's Hoffmann also says that sources. however can sh-ovno more This theology argument of mission. his is in line he has included that than that material with ("St. S. Jellicoe Luke and the theology of mission. it is 'Seventy(-Two)"') that NTS 8(1960-1) argues pp. 319-21) love of the LXX led him to use the Luke's Lukan in that "Just Letter emissaries as the seventy-two of Aristeas brought had, by their the knowledge translation, of Aristeas (-two) so the seventy world, of the Law to the Greek-speaking fulfilment its in to proclaim are divinely commissioned I'St. Luke See also S. Jellicoe the Gospel message " (p. 321). JBL 80(1961) of Aristeas" pp. 149-S, and the Letter "&ompostion, Quellen by G. Sellin followed und recently (Lk. 9: 51-19-28)" Lu-kanischen Reise1jAchtes Furkion-des Nov. T 20(1978) p. 115. Works and A. M. Hunter 581. T. W. Manson Sayings pp. 73ff.; 1973) pp. 203 and 208; Caird Luke Words (SCM, London, p. 144 ; 582. treeter Gospels p. 192. and 291 and in Studies pp. 289f. Hawkins in Studies p. 135. (Calwer, 1960) p. 281. 583. A. Schlatter Stuttgart, Lukas Note also SB II pp. 167f.. Promise 584. On the visions p. 113 and of Jesus see K&mel n. 27. (and notes). 585. Note K&mel Promise pp. 133f. (eg. ) Jeremias 586. Besides here see also the two mentioned Parables p. 122 n. 33. (Lutterworth, London, 587. The Historic Mission of Jesus 1941) p. 66. 588. Langton Essentials p. 170. 589. As does KUmmel Pr3mise p. 113. Parables 590. So Jeremias Pearabiles, p., 122 and E. Linnemann (SPCK, London, 1966) p. 102. of Jesus be drawn in the next 591. Conclusions to this chapter will two chapters.
IV JESUS-THE-EXORCIST (Notes) 1. On what follows see also Dunn and Twelftree Churchman 94(1980) pp. 211-215. 2. See Dunn Jesus -p. 44 and n. 17. 3. See Eitrem Notes p. 9 and notes. , 4. Cf. t. Hul. ii: 22f.; J. Shab. xiv: 4: 14d; J. Abodah Zarah ii: 2: 40d-41a; b. Abodah Zarah 27b. 5. Cf. Justin 30: 3; 76: 61 85: 2; Apology Martyr Dialog 11: 6. The topic in the post-apobtolic of exorcism is one period interest, but beyond the scope of this of considerable (See W. M. Alexander Demonic Possession in the present; study. (T &T Clark New Testament Edinburgh, 1902) 129-233; pp. , A. Harnack The Mission 1 (1905, and Expansion of Christianity ET, Williams 1908) pp. 125-461 J. S. McEwin "The and Norgate, Ministry SJT 7(1954) of Healing" pp. 133-52). See Dunn and Twelf-tree Churchman 94(1980) think b. San. 43a "is probably that p. 213. I no longer an echo laid (sic. ) Jesus by the Pharisees of the charge against in Mark 3: 22" (Ibid. ) - see chap. V n. 57 below. preserved 7. See also Pistis Sophia 102: 255,258; 130: 332-335; Hippolytus Refutatio VII: 15,20. 8. Strauss Life Miracle pp. 415-37, esp. p. 436; Richardson J. M. Robinson A New Quest of the Historical pp. 68-74; Jesus (SCM, London, 1959) p. 121; M.. Dibelius (1939, ET, SCM, Jesus 1963) chap. VI; Fuller London, Miraclbs: chap. 2; Perrin -, Rediscovering p. 65; 0. Betz What Do We Know about Jesus? (1965, ET, SCM, London, 1968) p. 58; Hahn Titles p. 292; Jeremias Theology I pp. 86-92; 0. B8cher Christus pp. 166-70; Vermes Jesus pp. 58-65; Dunn Jesus p--44. 9. See literature in n. 133 chap. I. cited 10. See chap. I. 11. See p. 333 bdow. 12. See pd+jabove. 13. See p. doabove. 'Midrashl 14. On the genre "The see for example A. G. Wright Lite3mry Genre Midrash" CBQ. 28(1966) PP. 105-38 and 417-57 and notes. 15. St. Th. 18(1964) pp. 35? -, 72. 16. See also A. Vo"gtle "The Miracles in Jesus of Jesus ...... in His Time (ed. ) H. J. Schultz (1966, ET, Fortress, 1971) p. 101. Philadelphia, 17. See pJ75 'above. 18. H. Greeven TDNT VI p. 762. 19. kpa, 7w has a religious in the Greek world, significance but only in relation to the demonic and so we can infer in the use of the word itself in Mark save that nothing we (cf. the demonic as far as Mark is concerned, are dealing with W. Grundmann TDNT III pp. 898f. ). 20. Weiss quoted by B. W. Bacon ....... " Demonic Recognition.... (Bacon (p. 156) takes ZNW 6(1905) 1: 24 to be the p. 154. theoretical (cited on the basis addition of 5: 7; Weiss p. 157L the other way round. )
IV
21.
4.04
(cf. 16; 31); Lucian Philops Philostratus 111: 38; Life (cf. IV: 20; 2: 4: 11; Acts Acts 13 of Peter of Andrew p. 9 line (Hennecke II Acts fifth 44f4 Acts p. 403) of Thomas of act: "The Destruction John 40); of the Temple of Artemis": see 6; b. Pes. 112b-113a. Lucian Disowned also 22. See also Fp. aslfbelow. 23. Hull in Tradition Magic Held See pp. 128ff.; pp. 172ff.. also pp. 137ff. above. 24. See note 19 above. 25. Kertelge Wunder p. 52.
26. Thel-Iteratureon "Son of God" is overwhelming. Much of the material is collected in the following; TDNT VIII p. 334; ThWNT X/2 pp. 1282f.; DNTT, pp. 665f. 1 see also "Sohn Gottes" In-RGG3VI: 118-20 and M. Hengel The Son of God (1975, ET, SCM, London, 1976); in the and now J. D. G. Dunn Christology (SCM, London, Making 1980).
27. For example see Taylor Mark p. 225; Nineham Mark p. 112; Schweizer Mark pp. 78ff.. 28. W.G. iel (1972, ET, Theology 6F the New Testament SCM, London, 1974) p. 74. 29. Ibid. p. 76.
Hintergrund NTS 17(1970-1) pp. 422-4.
32. Son p. 41. 33. Such a survey has been done before on more than one for example, E. Schweizer (et al. ) TDNT VIII occasion; Hengel Son. pp. 340-55; and recently 34. Hengel Son p. 21. 35.1b; dpp. 21f.; cf. G. Fohrer TDNT VIII pp. 347f.. 36. Hengel fbid; p. 22. 37. Md. 22f.. pp. 38. Vermes Jesus T)p. 205-10; JJS 23(1972) pp. 28-50 and 24(1973) Hengel Ibid. p. 42 n. 85; pp. 51-641 cf. Flusser Jesus pp. 98ff.; J. D. G. Dunn Unity and Diversity (SCM, London, 1977) p. 45 and notes. 39. Cf. Mtt. 4: 6/Lk. 4: lof.. "The Contribution 40. J. A. Fitzmyer of Qumran Aramaic to the Study of the New Testament" NTS 20(1973-4) p. 393; cf. Dunn Unity p., 45. 41. See the discussion in Fitzmyer Ibid. p. 392. Dunn in the Making p. 47 places Mk. 3: 11 and 5: 7 Christology together However, we have seen (nt7 as demonic confessions. by Mark so that above) 3: 11 is probbly entirely rewritten Nevertheless only 5: 7 can be said to be a demonic confession. Dunn is right to say that it "would seem to imply recognition simply of one specially commissioned or favoured by God being sent without necessarily evoking the idea of a divine from heaven". 42. Ver-IM 'EMI-j'afP-2'06ff43. Dunn Unity p. 45. 44. Ibid. 45. Ibid.
IV 46. Ibid. p. 46 (his emphasis). 47. Eg. L. Morris Luke (IVP, London, 1974) pp. 109 and 156. 48. For example by McCasland Finger Taylor pp. 110-15; Mark p. 176; E. Fascher Die Formsgeschichtliche Methode (T8pelmann, 142-4) pp. 127f.; Giessen, S. E. Johnson Mark (Black, 1960) p. 48. London, 49. Spirit p. 57. 50. R. Herzog Die Wunderheilungen von Epidauros p. 17 in Loos Miracles p. 330. 51. Cf. Hull Magic p. 68. "The Saliva 52. F. W. Nicolson in Classical Superstition 8(1897) in Classical Studies Philology Literature" Harvard Magic pp. 76-8; Loos Miracles pp. 23-40 and n. 1; also Hull in particular on the Babylonian texts pp. 306-13. see .. (Hinrichs, im Neuen Testament A. Jeremias Babylonisches 1905) p. 108; Eitrem Notes p. 46 Leipzig,
405
53. P04 111: 420. 37. 54. NH XXVIII: E-ee 55. b. Sheb. 15b: (cf. Blau Zauberwesen p. 68). The Essenes did not permit BJ 11: 8. spitting, 56. See Loos Miracles p. 310 and notes. 57. See E-LahseTDNT IXPP-*31f-(et al. ) (Aramaic from Qumran (Leiden, 58. B. Jongeling Texts 1976) pp. 99, n. 22) are incorrect Brill, when they say "the is well on of hands as an act of exorcism of)52eying practice " in the New Testament, mark V: 23.... cf. especially attested because Mk. 5: 2i is not related and 1 QapGen. as an exorcism is our only other of evidence. piece 'sighing' 59. on Jesus p. 325. see Loos Miracles 60. Some of the Apologists tried to make a case for the he used that miracles authenticity of Jesus' on the grounds by at all; cited see the literature no aids or medicines i; -ridrichsen Miracles pp. 305f.. pp. 89ff. and Loos. Miracles , in Miracles by E. R. Micklem The suggestion and the New (Oxford 1922) p. 105, that University, Psychology Oxford, foundationin his healings is without Jesus sometimes used oil 94(19801 61. Dunn and Twelftree churchman pp. 214f.. 62. Cf. Vermes Jesus p. 64, though we cannot Vermes agree with Jesus was accused because he never invoked that any human (p. 66) some Rabbis for even as Vermes notes exorcised source demons without evoking an authority. 63. SB. II p. 10. 64. SB. II p. 17f.. 65. See for example Fiebig iiadische Wundergeschichten p. 72; (and notes). Jeremias Prayers Dunn Jesus pp. 15-21 pp. 72-8; "Prayer 24(1973) 66. P. T. O'Brien in Luke-Acts" T. Bull pp. 111-27;, cf. also Dunn Jesus p. 17 and n. 23, and most in "The Prayer-Motif in Luke-Acts" A. A. Trites recently (Association Professors Perspectives on Luke-Acts of Baptist 1978) Clark Danville, Edinburgh, of Religion, and T&T , pp. 168-86.
IV
406
67. Bauer; TDNT V pp. 462f. cf. K. L. Schmidt and notes; (cf. Josephus Ant. 18: 124); P. Oxy. 3275: 40,46; cf. 3295: 19,24 (et al. ) is an loath'. See also Bell where opkaS 19f., PBA 17(1931) p. 251, lines cf. pp. 255,266 and eg. PGM IV: 3019,3033,3039,3045,3052,3056, Deissmann Studies p. 274; cf. P. Oslo 1: 153 and pp. 72f. 1 (and though Christian, Sol. Moulton see Test. passim)l and Milligan; Scott; Liddelland cf. Acts 19: 13. 68. On which see E. Schweizer (Vandenhoeck Ego Eimi & , 1965) pp. 18f.; I Ruprecht, Go"ttingen, Theology Jeremias pp. 250ff. 69. E. Stauffer TDNT II p. 348 (quoted p. 123above). 70. In fact to find any examples so far I have been unable its that use in Mk. 9: 25. parallel 71. HTR 36(1943) pp. 47ff. 1 see also HTR 37 (1944) pp. 334ff.. 72. In Bonner's (see note above) he cites second article a modern example. 7j. Mussner Miracles p. 5. 74. Ibid., R. Schnackenburg also Loos Miracles pp. 280-6; 1968) (1959, ET, Herder, G o. d1s Rule and Kingdom New York, (SPCK, London, G. E. Ladd Jesus and the Kingdom pp. 120f.; 1964) pp. 145ff.; Kdmmel Promise pp. 109ff.. 75. Ibid. cf. p. 49. pp. 16ff., 76. See Achtemeier JBL 89(1970) p. 265. (1963, 77. X. Ledn-Defour The Gospels and the Jesus of History 1968) p. 123. ET, Collins, London, 78. on John's Cf. also Mk. 8: 14-21. Gospel see chap. V below. 79. Apart below see Fridrichsen from the literature cited Miracle-. pp. 75f.. in contrast 80. Bultmann History see his Jesus p. 112, though 1962) p. 124! London, and the Word (1934, ET, Fontana, 81. NTQT p. 100. (Evangelische 82. W. Grundlmann Das Evangelium nach Lukas 1963) p. 211; cf. E. Neuhausler Berlin, Verlagsanstalt, 1962) pp. 200: t. Gottes(Patmos, Anspruch I)dsseldorf, und Antwort "On the 83. K. Berger NTS 17(1970-1) Cf. D. Hill pp. 10-40; from the Creative Prophets" Role of Christian Evidence 'V NTS 20(1973-4) pp. 271-4 and J. D. G. Dunn "Prophetic Sayings NTS 24(1977-8) pp. 181f.. and the Jesus Tradition I 84. Jeremias Promise p. 50 n. 1; see also his, Theology, 15f., 19. pp. 10f.,
86. Cf. N. Perrin I pp. 31-5. KTmgd6m and Jeremias Theology 87. Jeremias Ibid. pp. 152-6. 88. Taylor Mark pp. 191f.; Schweizer Mark p. 60; ' Anderson -, in Jesus p. 103. 98i-. Mark pp. -V8gtle 89. Jesus p. 14; ci. His ry p. 12 and notes. 90. i7i,kas. 1 p. 309f.; Marshall Luke p. 234. cf. 91. Td_erson, Mark pp. lllf.; in DNTT III W. Stott p. 408. Cf. Jeremias I pp. 6 and 208ff.. Theology 92. Anderson Mark p. 112. , 93. See Jeremias Theology I pp. 208f..
p. 21.
IV
407
94. Cf. Sevenster cited by Loos Miracles p. 2811 Kallas Significance p. 77. 95. Ibid. pp. 280-6 I' E. Schweizer Jesus (1968, ET, SCM, London, 1971) p. 43; see also M. Grant Jesus (Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, 1977) p. 33 and n. 18. 96. Cited in Loos Miracles p. 282. 97. Ibid. 98. Jesus Christ and Mythology pp. 12f. 1 also cited by Hiers SJT*27(1974) p. 37, see also p. 38 for mention of others who hold these views. 99. Cf. Hiers Ibid. Miracle pp. 37f., and note Fridrichsen pp. 63-72. Eabove. 100. See FpA15 101. Hiers Jesus p. 63. 102. See also Hunter Work P. 83; V" 09 tle in Jesus p. 101. Wundergeschichten 103. Fiebig iddische pp. 72f.. 104. Hull Magic, see A. Macpherson's review in Scripture 5(1974) P. 48. Bulletin 105. Hengel Judaism. Dibelius Tradition 106. History pp. 133ff.. pp. 218ff.; 107. Bultmann History p. 240. 108. Symbols II pp. 173ff., and 191. 399 and 401. Quest Schweitzer pp. -109.
v AS OTHERS
SAW HIM
(Notes) 1. Loos Miracles pp. 131ff.. 2. Taylor Mark p. 176. (my emphasis). 3. Ibid., Die Fascher Taylor also quotes for7m-geschichtliche Methode pp. 127f.. 4. H. Wansborough it was the crowd that that was suggests 'out of control', ("Mark 3: 21 - Was Jesus out of his Mind? " NTS 18(1971-2) mean pp. 233f. ) butyqTI-vrc. can hardly 'calm down'. Cf. Dunn Jesus p. 384 n. 115; D. Wenham "The Meaning of Mark 3-.'Il" NTS 21(1974-5) pp. 295f.. 5. E. Best "Mark 3: 20# 21,31-35" NTS 22(1975-6) pp. 309-19; Mark p. 236. cf. Taylor 6. Cf. Taylor Mark p. 235; Dunn Jesus pp. 86f.. 7., See Pryke Style pp. 309f. '. p. 12. Cf. Best NTS 22(1975-6) 8. Anderson Mark p. 121; Jn. 10: 20; (Acts 12: 15f. ). In Josephus Ant. 6: 168 Saul, who had had a demon which was cha=ed Cf. PR 40ab to himself". away, is said to have been "restored by Vermes Je9us pp. 64f. ). and Tanh. B. 4 (quoted in the 9. on the equation and 'Son of David' of 'Messiah' in the First Centuries Gospels of the see G. F. Moore Judaism 1946) p. 329 (Harvard Era II Cambridge, Christian University, (London, Christology R. H. Fuller New Testament and notes; 1965) pp. lllff.. See also Mk. 3: 11. 10. SB IV pp. 534f.; The Method and Message of D. S. Russell (SCM, London, Barrett 1964) pp. 285ff.; Jewish Apocalyptic des 57ff.; Religion Bousset, Die Gressmann Sptrit and pp. (Mohr, Tubingen, 1966) pp. 218ff.; Paul Volz Judentums im Neuestamentlichen der jildischenGemeinde Die Eschatologie 9 31; Schdrer (Olms, Hildesheim, History II, 1966) Zeitalter pp. 527ff.. 11. See last note. (Vandenhoeck 12. C. Burger Jesus als Davidssohn & Ruprecht, 1970) p. 41; Dunn Unity G8ttingen, pp. 43f.. 13. Duling NTS 20(1973-4) pp. 68f.. (1904, ET, 14. J. Klausner The Messianic Idea in Israel 1955) p. 392. Macmillan, New York, 15. Dalman Words p. 317; Fuller Christology p. 33. 16. Mid first old Testament BC; Eissfeldt p. 613. century 17. See Charlesworth Pseudepigrapha p. 196. is 18. Dzlman (Words p. 317) says that the designation dependent as Is. 9: 5 ; 11: 10; upon such passages probably Jer. 23: 5; 33: 15. 19. Dalman Ibid. but see below. 20. See n. 10 above, 21. Ps. Sol. 17 (cf. Sir. 47: 11; I. Mace. 2: 57); Dalman Words Christology p. 317; Fuller p. 33. 22. Cf. Duling HTR 68(1975) pp. 235-52. 23. See references by H. F. D. Sparks' of de Jonge review given in JTS 6(1955) Testaments Patriarchs P-287. of the Twelve 24. M. de Jonge The Testaments A of the Twelve Patriarchs: (Van Gorcum, Study of their-Text, Composition and Origin 1953). debate Assen, On the present see J. Becker der der Testamente Untersuchungen zur Entstehungsgeschichte
4og
(Brill, 1970); Patriarchen Leiden, Charlesworth zwolf de Jonge "The Interpretation Pseudepigrapha of pp. 211ff.; in in Years" Patriarchs Recent the Testaments the Twelve of Text and Patriarchs; 'Studies of the Twelve on the Testaments (Brill, 1975) by M. de Jonge Leiden, Interpretation The Testaments H. D. -Slingerland of the Twelve pp. 183-92; (Scholars, A Critical History Patriarchs: of Research 1977) esp. chap. VI. Missoula, in "The Messiah 25. de Jonge Testaments M. Black p. 89; cf. Exp. T 60(1948-9) the Testament p. 322. of Levi xViii" 26. Cf. Mk. 1: 10f.. 3: 63,72, being Sib. 27. The earliest or. about occurrences "The Provenance BC (J. J. Collins and Date century mid-second Bulletin Sibyl" of Jewish of the Institute of the Third 2(1974) ERE ii p. 459; W. Bousset G. A. Barton Studies pp. 1-18), 11 (1920) pp. 76ff.; Revelation R. H. Charles ERE I pp. 587ff.; TDNT I p. 607. W. Foester RGG3 1: 1025f.; K. Galling 28. Sea Pre vious n 0c; cAce Eissfeldt Old Testament and pp. 615ff. literature cited). 29. R. H. Charles The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs 1908) pp. 103ff.; de Jonge Testaments (Black, London, p. 32. 30. de Jonge Ibid. 24 set out in Charles 31. Compare the texts of chapter Testaments pp. 101f.. 32. Ibid. pp. 128f.. 33. de Jonge Testaments p. 90; (cf. Mk. 16: 18). "Priestly 34. Ibid. p. 87; cf. p. 92. Cf. A. J. B. Higgins NTS 13(1966-7) Messiah" pp. 227f.. 35. de Jonge Testaments p. 37. 36. Ibid. p. 89 and n. 245. led. ) The Books of Enoch (Clarendon, oxford, 37. J. T. Milik 1976) p. 91; M. A. Knibb "The Date of the Parables of Enoch: C. L. Mearns NTS 25(1978-9) Review" A Critical cf. pp. 345-9; "The Parables and Date" Exp. T 89(1977-8) of Enoch - Origin pp. 118f.. 38. Followed by Barrett Spirit p. 59. (Yehuda and Shimon) 39. The Rabbis mentioned are both from ) notes. (Ibid. the second century as Barrett I 40. See Schu'rer History p. 97; cf Enc. jud. 13: 335. Method Russell 41. Charles Pseude igrapha p. 412; cf. P. 29o. 42. Cf. W. Foester TDNT II p. 78 (and note 43). 4Q Flor. Jud. include 43. In this Test. and we should category 1: 7f. which Also see the demise of Satan as part of the new than the work of a particular rather of affairs state individual. 44. Russell Method p. 309 45. Ibid. p. 285. 46. Spirit p. 59. the 47. If Jesus was, in his exorcisms, self-evidently to explain Messiah then it is difficult why the fourth
410
Gospel does not make use o,f what would potentially be a useful in his Gospel. component 48. Jesus p. vii. 49. Smith p. 59. So. Smith p. 46. Cf. R. in T. Herford Christianity Talmud and (Reference Midrash Book Publishers, Clifton New Jersey# 1966 (19031) pp. 35ff.. 51. Smith p. 47. 52. See b. San. 67a (The Soncino 1935) Press Edition, London, p. 456 n. 5. 53. See n. 50 Above. 54. Herford Christianity p. 38. 55. H. L. Strack. Jesus, di6 Ha'retiker... (Hinrichs, 1910) Leipzig,, IV. chap. 56. b. Gitt. 90a. Epstein's note to b. San. 67a (The Soncino 1935) p. 457. Press, London, 57. Ibid. (H. Derenbourg Essai et la sur 11histoire de la-Palestine (Paris, 1967) note 9 pp. 468-71); geographie (1922, ET, Macmillan, J. Klausner Jesus of Nazareth 1927) p. 21 and notes; New York, Christianity cf. esp. Herford "Jesus in the Talmud" pp. 344ff. and notes and J. Z. Lauterbach (Ktav, in Rabbinic 1973, reprint Essays New York, of 1951 ed. ) p. 477 to us one single preserved statement not-even literature in the talmudic-midrashic can be regarded in the in the sense that it originated as authentic half time of Jesus or even in the first of the Christian (his emphasis). era" for the G. Bornkamm Jesus p. 28 (cf. n. 3) - regarding sources is what the Talmud life of Jesus says - "Even less productive later and end. It betrays reports about Jesus' appearance but a knowledge whatsoever and is nothing no independent of the Christian and tendentious misrepresentation polemical It makes Jesus into tradition. seducer and a magician, his condemnation". to justify * and tries agitator, political 58. Smith p. 47. His evidence for this is the unsupported by second the same charges statement cre specified - "because in the Jewish century pagan and Christian writers as elements ) of him " (Ibid. account . 59. Pages in parenthesds Jesus. to Smith's refer (Mohr, Tubingen, 60. An die Galater 1971) pp. 45f.. 61. Ibid. 62. studies, p. 358, his empahsis. (Galate 6: 17 45) more reasonably 63. Lietzmann that says p. , is undoubtably to 2 Cor. 4: 10; Rm. 8: 17; Ph. 3: 10; related Col. 1: 24. 64. SeeEp. 3/qftelow. (Blackwell, 65. Martyrdom in the Early Church and Persecution 1965) p. 174 n. 51. oxford, 66. Ibid. p. 162 and footnotes. 67. TbId. (and see note 52). 68. Letters X: 96.
411
69. The Letters (Clarendon, 1966) pp. 704f.. Oxford, of Pliny (Sherwin-White is interacting principally with Mohlberj, Coulton and Lietzmann with regard to early Christian liturgical ) practices. 70. Ibid. p. 705. 71. Smith p. 180 and see p. 3z1below where Justin is quoted more fully. 72. F. F. Bruce Jesus and Christian Origins Outside the New Testament (Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1974) p. 21. 7,3. Although Smith has not adequately dealt with Josephuss the problems of the authenticity of Ant. 18: 63-4 makes a discussion impossof the use of the passage here virtuallr ible. Paul Winter "Josephus on Jesus" Journ. of Hist. Stud. 1(1968) pp. 289-302 and in a revised form in Schiarer History I pp. 428-41. 74. Smith p. 21 (chap. 3). 75. This verse, in a Homily by Abraham Bishop of Ephesus in 10 00,0zicts is cited with the addition the sixth century, P<dt"& J. Mehlmann "John 8: 48 in Some Patristic fcgivv-101"t 44(1963) p. 2061 cf. 8: 41. Quotations" Biblica (n. p. 179), 77, cf. 96f.. 76. Smith pp. 32,47f., 77. For example 1yo has this meaning in Demosthenes or. 47: 45. 78. To the (without "Was C. H. Kraeling evidence) contrary Jesus Accused of Necromancy? " JBL 59(1940) p. 154. 79. TDNT, II pp. 816-32, esp. pp. 821f.. 80. Ibid. pp. 821f.. 81. Ibid. p. 822. 10: 20,21; 82. Jn. 7: 20; 8: 48,49,52; and Mk. 3: 30 where 'unclean is used rather than 'demon'. spirit' 83. See Marshall Luke p. 516, cf. p. USabove. 84. The phrase is used by Matthew and Luke only v Verea, (Mtt. 11: 18/ in relation to John the Baptist's aesthetics Lk. 7: 33) and the Gadarene Demoniac (Mtt. 8: 28/Lk. 8: 27). 85. As a Samaritan Goet or Gnostic, Bultmann John p. 299 n. 4; Studies I" BJRL 40(1957-8) see also J. Bowman "Samaritan pp. 298-308. 86. Bowman Ibid. pp. 300f. ; 87. So-- for example R. E. rown John I (Chapman, London, 1971) London, 1972) p. 365; p. 387; B. Lindars John (Oliphant, John (1967) p. 314. Barrett 88. Cf. H. Preisker TDNT IV p. 361. 89. Bowman BJRL40(1957-8) pp. 305f.. 90. Ibid. p. 306. 91. Ibid. p. 307. 92. Ibid. p. 308. 93. Smith eg. pp. 33,54,181.
94. "Llaccusation de madie contre le Evangiles" ETL 15(1938) pp. 44.9-90. 95. Ibid. -p. 459f.. 96. Ibid.. p. 460. 97. Ibid. 98. H. Braun TDNT VI p. 229; Diodorus Christ dans les
Sicdlus
Hist.
11: 18
412
(P. 'Lond. 11: 483: 19). 99. Plato Rep. IV: 444b, -. Phaedo 81a. 100. Braun TDNT VI p. 233. 101. Ibid. p. 235. 102. amain-ETL 15(1938) p. 45.6. 103. Smith pp. 33,174. 104. Samain ETL 15(1938) pA62. 105. Ibid. 106. E 11: 13. 107. Fk-. III ch. 2 and 3. 108. Smith p. 33 tnd: note p. 174. 109. Scorniace-12: 3. 110 T il"vinarlullmn3I2n3mqtituti'onm 11: 16: 4. 111: 112. -In. Danielem Iii: 2c%. 113. Cf. *Smith p. 174.
(oxford, 1961) p. 167. Epistle F. W. Beare First of Peter 11:1 and 112 above. Cf. notes See note 109 above. See note 110 above. Cf. Smith p. 33. 699,782; Epistle Sherwin-White Letters cf. pp. -119. Annals XV: 44; C. Bigg Epistles X: 96: 3; Tacitus of St. Peter 1902) p. 137. Edinburgh, and St. Jude (T &T Clarke, (Frank Kermcde The New York 120. Cf. a review of'-Smith is 1978 p. 58), "It Review of Books XXV (20, Dec. 21st, be referred to as that magicians might plausible perfectly doers. that it does not follow not accuse one could evil he was a that without-claiming somebody of doing evil magician". Proof 121. Cf. Eusebius also note of the Gosz)el 3: 3. We could is at the heart it was the fabrication that that of element 'magic'. the Roman 1_sagainst 122. Cf. the categories. in Acts 13: 10 and see above on Tertullian. if 123. Cf. Winter thought that Trial an p. 144. It is often does not involve'the or use of physical exorcism is not then the healing aids or incantations mechanical in Qumran? " Kairos (eg. W. Kirchschla'ger "Exorcismus magical is said "the New Testament 18(1976) Thus it miracles p. 52). " have bonnection Jesus and processes... means no of with'magic M Grundmann TDNT II p. 302).. There is a note of here desperation (see the editorial Magic in review of Hull r 355f. ). Exp. T 85(1973-4) The abho ence of magic in the pp. is noted Jesus must be absolved Bible and so, at all costsf from any charge in terms of of magic - magic defined (cf. IDB technique Mendelsohn. IDB III Hull pp. 223ff.; here. Supp. pp. 312ff. l. There are two problems or errors is-a there We have seen that *Firstly of definition. problem in relation to miracles the bald categories and exorcizm of Imagicall(evil)/Inon-magicall(good), when defined in terms of technique, in are not helpful primarily in the NT era (contrast the exorcisms Hull understanding in t1ne attempt Magic chapjVj. The second problem at 114. 115. 116. 117. 118.
413
Jesus from the charge to absolving of magic is., one relating historical if we define method. magic in terms of is technique it aids or incantations an error - physical judgment (or to say that Jesus' techniques of historical for example) have nothing to do with magical exorcism in this or that processes way he is quite unique and from his contemporaries (eg. L. Morris The Cross separate (Paternoster, 1976) pp. 56f. in the New Testament Exeter, is We saw in chaps. III there and notes). and IV above that had clear that Jesus' technique as an exorcist good evidence in this 'magic' so called parallels world. 124. JBL 59(1940) pp. 147-57. 125. Ibid. p. 153. 126. Ibid. p. 154. 09, 127. Vermes Jesus p. Dunn JesuS, p. 88 and Barrett cf. p. 57. 128. Vermes Ibid. V. '7q Mid. 129. pp. 69 and 79. 130. Cf. Ibid. p. 63. 131. Cf. Mtt. 12: 27/Lk. 11: 19 132. Vermes ;Le_sus p-&Soadn-31133. See also A. R. C. Leaney's of Vermes in JTS 25 review (1974) p. 490. 134. Cf. Robinson Problem chap. 3. is a Markan summary-see History 135. That this Bultmann p. 341; Mark pp. 180ff.; Dibelius Tradition Taylor pp. 44,224; (for Wunder pp. 31f.; Anderson Mark p. 93; Kertelge other literature I p'. 136. ). on these verses see Pesch Markus. 136. See Bultmann History p. 341; Best Temptation pp. 73; JIM Christology" L. E. Keck "Mark 3: 7-12 and Mark's 84(1965) Kertelge Horstmann Studien pp. 341-358; pp. 119,126; Wunder pp. 34f.; Marxsen Mark p. 63 n. 38; E. Trocme The, ;f Mark (1963, ET, SPCK, London, Formation of the Gospel Mark p. 225; 1975) p. 153 n. 2; Schweizer Mark pp. 78ff.; Taylor (for literature I on the pericope other see Pesch Markus. p. 202). in Mark" T. Bull 137. J. D. G. Dunn "The Messianic Secret 21(1970) Cf. C. F. Evans The Beginning of the pp. 92-117. (SPCK, London, 1968) p. 45. Gospbl 138. Schweizer Mark pp. 54ff.. 139. Hull magic p. 144. 140. See especially the discussion of Smith above. 141. Magic chap. 7. See esp. pp. 128ff.. 142. Ibid. p. 129. 143. 'Ibid 144. In Tradition pp. 168ff.. 145. See also Mtt. 22: 41-45. 146. cf. NTS 24(1977-8) Duling pp. 393ff.. 147. Magic chap. 6. 148. Note particularly Achtemeier I*n Peespechves pp-diff-
414
149. Note Achtemeier Ibidp. 163 n. 2o. 150. Ibid. p. 163. 151. ! bid. p. 164. 152. See also Leaney Luke p. 157 'and Marshall Luke p. 341. 153. The problem has been noted before, for example, C. F. D. Moule "The Classification in Stories" of Miracle Miracles p. 241. 154. Cf. Grayston Ep-R 2(1975) pp. 90-4. 155. Cf., for example, Taylor Mark p. 171. 156. See Loos Miracles pp. 306ff.. 157. -Fridrichsen Theology 22(1931) p. 127 and note. 158. See also Dunn and Twelftree Churchman 94 (1980) p)*--2A0F-159. Pausanias Description See of Greece VI, XXXVI, 1,2. Loos Miracles John (1978) p. 188. p. 601; Barrett 160. ,See Loos Miracles pp. 328ff.. 161. Though some do not see any relationship between this (for example Johannine miracle traditions and Synoptic L. Morris John (Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1971) p. 288) See the same incident may lie behind both traditions. Barrett John (1978) p. 245. Brown John pp. 192f.; ,I 162. Loos Miracles pp. 435ff. 163. History pp. 619ff.. p-. 234; see also Loos Miracles 164. Loos Miracles pp. 655ff. and notes gives the sources for parallels. 165. See Dunn and Twelftree Churchman 94(1980) pp. 220f.. 166. Eusebius HE 4: 3: 2. See P. 306above. 6-9. 167. Dialog. See p. 3;U above. 168. CC 1: 7,28,68. See p. 322.above. Zf 169. FfAbove. ul pp. . 170. In view of the present position of the 'divine-man' debate - in which it is now generally doubted that it is a to use in relation to Jesus - it is useful category it in our discussions. for us to consider See unnecessary Dunn Jesus p. 69 and notes, and C. R. Holladay Theios Aner in , (Scholars, 1977); cf. the Missoula, Hellenistic-Judaism in JTS 30(1979) pp. 246-52. review of Holladay by W. Telford 171. Cf. Tiede Charismatic chap. Three. 172. Cf. L. Morris Cross pp-66 F.. , 173. Cf. J. P. Heil "Significant Aspects of the Healing in Matthew" CBQ 41(1979) pp. 285f.. Miracles
vi JESUS-THE-EXORCIST
(His
Self
Understanding) (Notes)
1. See particularly Dunn Jesus p. 13. 2. Fridrichsen Miracle p. 72. , 12f. 3. Dunn Jesus pp. (his emphasis). 4. Ibid. (b) C[bid. pp. 47f. ). p. 47, though see Dunn's point S. Ibid. Exp. T 82 (1970-1) p. 49 and "Spirit and Kingdom" This 39, p. emphasis). 6. Dunn almost in "Spirit Ibid. says this and Kingdom" (History Bultmann Cf. Dunn Jesus pp. 47f.. p. 239) says from his success Jesus "concludes that the Kingdom of God has be for there is no question that come". -This can hardly other were successful exorcists eyes, - even in Jesus' Mtt. 12: 27/Lk. 11: 19. cf. Mk. 9: 38f. /Lk. 9: 49E.; 7. As Otto Betz "Jesu Helliger Krieg" Nov. T 2(1958) pp. 116-37. B. Note Dunn Jesus p. 47 "We should this aspect not permit our familiarity with to dull the edge of this assertion. of Jesus' preaching For this The was an astonishing and audacious claim. " (his kingdom was already present! eschatological emphasis). Churchman 94(1980) See also Dunn and Twelftree p. 220. 9. See Dunn and Twelftree Ibid. pp. 220 and n. 31. 1O. Parables pp. 81-5. ll. Cf. L. Cope "Matthew xxv 31-46, 'The Sheep and the Goats' Nov. T 11(1969) Reinterpreted" pp. 32-44. 12. 'The Ruler in the NT only in in. World' of this occurs John 11 (1971, ET, Burns & Oatesp London, Cf. R. Schnackenburg 1980) pp. 39off. John p. 431. and Bultmann 13. Bultmann Ibid. p. 508 and n. l. 'EH. Fuller 14. Contrast The Mission of Jesus and Achievement (SCM, London, 1954) p. 38. 15. Their to Jesus' view of the end of Satan in relation ' is well simmed up by Barrett. ministry "The devil is defeated, but he is not destroyed. The his devices to Church was too well acquainted with Satan had died " Spirit suppose that p. 52. (expressed 16. This conclusion in with the view would tie by Bultmann I p. 4) that Theology, Jesus proclaimed and impending irruption of the Reign of an immediately expected KGmmel Promise God. See particularly esp. pp. 105ff.; "Eschatological in the Proclamation ExpectAtion of Jesus" (ed. ) J. M. Robinson in The Future Past of Our Religious (1964, ET, SCM, London, 1971) pp. 29-48; Kingdom and Perrin esp. chap. V. 17. See the summary of evidence in Perrin Kingdom p. 83. 18. See Jeremias Parables Matthew pp. 230f. pp. 224f. and Hill (Mtt. 13: 36-43) (The interpretation is of the parable the work of Matthew, Ibid. probably see Jeremias pp. 81-5). 19. Luke in particular this theine. up and develops picks healing For example in relating-the Mother-in-law of Peter's
vi
416
(Mk. 1: 29-34/Mtt. 8: 14-17/Lk. 4: 38f. ) he describes it as an exorcism saying that Jesus rebuked the fever and that it left her. And in 13: 10-17 Luke has written up a healing into an exorcism so that Jesus' assault against Satan is "The (J. Wilkinson seen as wider than just the exorcisms. Case of the Bent Woman in Luke 13: 10-17" EQ 49(1977) pp. 195-205. ) 20. Dunn Jesus pAB.
SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY (Excluding dictionary articles Miracle and commentaries) Tradition and Divine Man".
Achtemeierol -----Interp.
P. J.
"Gospel
26(1972)
PP-174-97. on the Miracles Perspectives Edinburgh, of Jesus: A ) (ed. Luke-Acts on and Association Danville USAj
of Religion,
1978) PP-153-67.
Jesus: A Study of Mark and the Historical 9: 14-29" CBQ 37(1975) pp. 471-91. "Miracles
"The Origin Catenaell and Function of the Pre-Marcan Miracle JBL 91(1972) pp. 198-221o
of Pre-Markan Miracle
Messianic References
Catdnaell
Literature"
Ambrozic.,
A. M. "New Teaching
Michael Word and SPirit: in Honour of*David --E_ssays Allowdale (Regis College, (ed. ) J. -Plevnik Stanley Ontario, 1975) PP-113-49Annen., F. '! Die DAmonenaustitibungen .TB 50976) Jesu in den synoptischen History in the Evangelien" Attridge.,
tAntiquitates Missoula,
Bacon.,
Baron.,
B. W. "The Markan Theory of Demonic Recognition NW 6(1905) PP-153-8. the Christ. ". Ze. .:............. .... ...
S. W. A Social and Religious (Col=bia-University, History
of
of the Jews
. 418
Barrette, CeKe The Holy Spirit and the Gospel Tradition (SPCK, London, 1947)-* Tradition Stories 1972)(SPCK, London, in the Gospel 1967).
Jesus and the Gospel Bartlett., D. L, Exorcism Yale, (Ph. D Thesisq Bauernfeind.,
of Mark
0. Die Worte der DUmonen im Markus ='evangelium (Koh1hammer, Stuttgart, 1927) F. W. "The Mission Matthew of the Disciples and the Mission JBL 89(1970) PP-1-13M41anges
Beare.,
Charge: Beasley-Murray.
10 and parallels"
9 (edse) Bibliques hommage P. R. B4da Rigaux en au (Duculot, A. Descamps and A. de Halleux Gdmblouxl
G*R. "Jesus
1970)
PP-463-78.
Becker., J., "Wunder und Christologiell NTS
16(1969-70)
(Wissenschaftli'che
PP-130-48.
Behm. im JDie Handauflegung Urchristentum 9 Buchgese32schaftg Darmstadt, 1968). HI. Nock., A. D. and Thompson.,
Bell.,
H. "Magical
Texts
from a Bilingual Papyrus in the British PBA 17(1931) PP-235-87Berger., K. "'Zu den sogennanten pp. lo-4o. Sfftzen heiligen NTS 17(1970-1)
Museum"
Rechts"
Best.,
E. 17, xorcism in the New Testament and Today" B Th 27(1977) PP1-9Iqlark's Use of the Twelve" ZNW69(1978) pp. 11-35. "The Role of the Disciples in Mark" NTS 23(1976-7) :PP-377-401. .................... The Temptation and the Passion: The Markan Soteriology, (Cambridge University, Cambridge, 1965)as Divine Man" Jesus and the Historian:
Betz*J. H. D. "Jesus
(ed. ) F. T. Trotter-(Westminster, In Honour of E. C. -Colwell Philadelphia, 1968) pp. 114.;.33. .................................. ....... Lukian von Samosata und das Neue Testament, ....religions! . -. ___. 7 -,_. 1-1. , _, _, _*_, _, " -- (Akademie, . Parallelen geschichtliche und__pargnetische Berlin, 1961).
419 Betz., 0. Mark's Christian "The Concept Christology'l Literature of the So-Called Studies 'Divine-Man' in aiid Ear Leiden, in New Testament
1972) pp. 229-40. Betz., 0. and Grimm., W. Wesen und Wirklichkeit der'Wunder Jesu (Peter Langq Frankfurt am Main, 1977)-
heiliger
Krieg"
M. An Aramaic Mroach (Clarendon Oxford, 1967) 9 "The Messiah in the Testament of Levi xviii"
Nov. T 20958)
(1948-9) pp-321-2,
Blau., L. Das altj'Udiische Zauberwesen (TrUbner,
1898).
Bligh, JO "The Gerasene Demoniac the Resurrection and j CB 310969) pp-383-90Christ" 2M Oo'Christus Exorcista: (Kohlhammer, DUmonismus und Taufe -Stuttgartj 1972)Beitrag zur im Neuen Testament IlDghonenfurcht Vorgeschichte Stuttgart-Mainz, Das Neue Testament (Katholisches Bonner., -...... C. Studies
of
BUcher.,
und DYmonenabwehr. Ein der christlichen 1970). und die d9monischen Taufe
(Kohlhammer*
MUchte
Bibelwerk, in Magical
Stuttgart, Amulets
Egyptian
(University
of Michigan
"The Technique
----)'Traces
HTR 360943) PP-39-49. of Exorcism" Technique in the Miracles" of Thaumaturgic PP-171-81. of Departing Demons" HTR 370944) PP-334-6.
Bornk&mm., G. Barth., G. and Held., H. J. Tradition and ...................... Interpretation in Matthew (19609 ET, SCM, London, 1963). Bouss6t., W. and Gressmann., H. Die Religion des Judentums ............................. (Mohr, Tilbingen, Zeitalter im spffthellenistischen 1966). Braude., W,G. Pesikta Rabbati (Yale University, New Haven,
1968).
42o
Breasted., JH, The Edwin Smith University, Records Surgical 1930). Documents Vol. III 1906). Papyrus 2 Vols. (Chicago Ancient Chicago,
of Egypt:
Historical Chicago,
(University
of Chicagog
Brown.,
P. "The Rise
Man in Late
London
N. 'Mas Messianische
(Herder, Bryan;,
C. P. Ancient Bles,
Medicine: 1930).
(Geoffrey Budge;,
E. A. T, Egyptian
(Kegan Paull
London,
1899)
fAe of Synoptic
Tradition 1963).
Oxford, Eine
Untersuchung
(Vandenhoeck
Burkill.,
pp. 161-77"Mark 3: 7-12 and the Alleged Dualism in the Evangelist's Miracle Material" JBL 870968) pp. 409-17-
New York,
Cadbury.,
H. J.
421
The Style and Liter Studies VI Method of Luke (1920) (Kraus Reprint,
Theological 1969).
for
Criterion
of Authenticity?
Vol-59
" BR 70962)
PP-151-63. NTS 11
Spirits" (Cambridge
(1964-5) Chadwick.,
H. Origen: Cambridge,
Charles.,
R. H. The Apocrypha
Press,
R. T. Myth and Symbol in Ancient London, 1959). Work Ascribed L. "An Apocryphal
Hudson, Cohn.,
to Philo
of
Alexandria" Colson.,
JQR 100898)
pp. 277-332.
F. H. and Whitaker., G. H. Philo Loeb Classical (Heinemann, London, 1929-62). Library 10 Vols. J. A. "The Verb Therapeu 431-4. pp. of in Matthew's Gospel" -,JBL 970978)
Comber.
Conybeare.
C. -Philostratus: Apollonius The Life of 9-F. (Heinemann, Tyana Loeb Classical Library 2 Vols. London, 1948). of Solomon" JQR 11(1898) pp. 1-45. 30(1968)
PP-522-36.
4;,p Cranfield., G.E. B. "St. Mark 9: 14-2911SJT 3(1950) PP-57-67Cumont., F. LIEgypt6 des Astrologues (La Foundation Egyptologique Reine Elizabeth, Bruxelless 1937)Da2man., G. The Words of Jesus (1898, ET, TO Clark, Edinburgh, 1902). Danker., F. W."The Demonic Secret in Mark: A Reexamin tion (15,34),, 61(1970) Cry Dereliction ZNW the of -of 48-69. pp.
Daube., D. The New Testament Press, London, and Rabbinic 1956). PP-45-59ET, Hodder Judaism (Athlone
39(1938) in 27" Ito Mark 1.22 JTS and rfova-tk Deissmann., A. Light from the Ancient East (1909, & Stoughton, Dellihg., London, 1910). Wundertexte 2., v8llig G. (ed. ) Antike
neu
des vorher von Paul Fiebig (de Gruyter, Berlin, 1960)9' und das-Wunderbarell Nov. T 2(1957)
pp, 291-309. Denis., A-M. Introduction (Brfll, Aux Pseudepigraphes Leiden, in 1970)The SyroGrecs D'Ancien
Testament Derrett.,
J. D. M; "'Law
Phoenician
&nd Event:
Dibelius., Dieterich.,
to Gospell(1933,
London, 1971). zur religionsgeschichte _studien (Teubner, Leipzig, 1891). spfften alterti3m ....... * ................... Med. ) Witch6raft, Douglas; Confession and Accusations
1 (Tavistock, 'Londong 1970).
Stories
and Their
Intention"
423 Drewes.,
Duling.
B. F. "The Composition
PP-92-101D. C. "The Promises Christianity
(1971) 9 into
to David
Nailing PP-55-77-
Down a Likely
NTS 20(1973-4)
NTS 24(1977-8)
. in I the . Making I (SCM, London, (SCM, London, lT6v, T 1975)o 14(1972) ppo8l-92.
Baptism"
. Dunn., * J. D. G. and Twelftree., Exorcism pp. 210-25. Dupont-Sommer., -...,., -ET9 ItExorcismes Oxford, in
G. Ho 'Temon-Possession 94(1980)
and
de QoumrAnII
pp. 246-61.
of Qumran and the Essenes: New Studies (1953, ScroUs Dead Sea ET, VaUentine, the on
Mitche3-19 London, 1954). Ebbell. 9 B.. The Papyrus Ebers: The Greatest Egyptian Medical Document (Ejna Munksgaard, Copenhagen & Oxford University Edelstein., Press, London, 1937). Relation to Religion L. IfGreek Medicine in its
and MagicIf-BHM 50937) pp-201-46. Edwards., I. E. S. 'Hieratic Papyri in the British Museum 4th Series 2 Vols. (British Museum, London, 1960). Eitrem., S. and Amundsen*, L. (eds. ) Papyri Osloenses Vol. I Magical Papyri (Norske Videnskaps. -Akademij Oslo, 1925). S. Some Notes in the Demonology in the New Testament (Brogger, Oslo, 1950).
Eitrem.,
424 Elliott.,
Ellis.,
Tradition:
of its*Christology" Patristic
Current
Interpretation:
C. Tenney, (ed. ) GoFo Hawthorne 1975) pp. 121-7; Epstein., *Wed. ) The Babylonian Press, Erman., London, 1935-52).
Talmud 34 Vols.
A. ItDie Bentreschstele"
Eine
Studie
zur (Niemeyer,
Halle,
P. W.Jo Artike
der
(Marcus
, JUdische Wundergeschichten (Mohr, TtIbingen, Z6italters ..., Rabbinische-Wundergdschichten , Zeitalters (Marcus "Neues zu den rabbinischen
und Weber,
Wundergeschichtent?
(1936) pp-308-9. -- ., -
AX44 "Zu. &.-n Wundern der Apostelgeschichtell Archiv ,0,*;, ftir neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte 2 und Kulturkunde (1926) PP-157f. L*R. "Can this be the Son of David? " Jesus and the Histotian: Colwell in Honor of Ernest Cadman (ed. ) F. T. Trotter (Westminster, Philadelphia, .............. Publications 1977). (Pqifical Written
Fisher.,
1968) pp; 82-97. .......................... Fitzmyer. -, J. A. The Dead Sea Scrolls Tools. for'Study-(Scholars, The Genesis , Biblical
Major
and,
Missoula,
Institute,
of Hands in a
of
) The Beginnings
The Acts
London,
1920, Vols. IV and V, 1933)A StILdZ in Magic and (Macmillan, London, 1955)BASOR 1450957)
G. "Prophetie
Religion Freedman.,
D. N. "The Prayer
PP-31-2. Fridrichsen., A. The Problem in Primitive 1972). (1925, ET, Augsbur&*,. Minneapolisg '-. j -. -. --Christianity "The Conflict'of Jesus with the Unclean Spirits" Theology Fuchs., Fuller., 220931) pp. 122-35. (Mohr, Tat und TtIbingenj
1971)o
The Mission
and Achievement
Christology
(Fontana,
Funk. -, R. W. (ed. ) Early (Society Gardiner., ......... AH. of Biblical Hieratic 2 Vols.
Stories
Montana,
in the British
Magic ians
in Ancient
PSBA 390917)
PP-31-44.
Gartner., R. B. "The Person PP-32-43, (.1.9_6_2_)_ pp...24.7. -55 _1_8. Statistics Electrohicae'Word TZ (Scholars Theurgic Press, Powers: Missoula, Parallels of Jesus and the Kingdom of God" Th-T 27(1970) Gaston.
L* "'Beeliebull?
BowlsIf
JJS*28(1977)
Accounts
Ancient Light'of of Jesus-izi*the ......... ................ Vol. II Revered Proceedings Men" SBL 1972 of
(ed. ) Lane C. McGaughty-PP-527-42. Gerhai-dssono, Matthew Be The Mighty (Gleerup, Lund, Acts of Jesus According to
1979)-
426
Ghalioungui., Egypt Gibbs. P. Magic and Medical Science in Ancient (Hodder & Stoughton, London, 1963)-
M; "'rPurpose and Pattern Use of the J. in Matthew's 9 Title 'Son of David"? NTS 100963-4) pp*446-64. X. Eusebii P.: Evange icae Praeparationis Gifford. E mphili: t 4 Vols. (Oxford Universityl Oxford, 1903)Ginzberg., Le'The Legends of the Jews 7 VolsSociety of Americaq in (The Jewish 1909-38).
1-johr;
Philadelphia,
M, E* "The Use of Miracles pp. 149-62. H. The Book of Protection EeRo Jewish (Pantheon Symbols Books for
(Henry
Frowde,
London,.
New York, -1953-68)0' Goodwin., G*W* Fragment Macmillan, of a Graeco-Egyptian Cambridgel 1852). Work Upon Magic (Deighton; Grant.,
R. M. Miracle
Apologist" "Quadratus, The First Christian .............. ......... Studies in Early Christian to Arthur V88rbus A Tribute ----------------------------in the Primarily Literature and its Environment, (The Lutheran School of Syrian East. (ed. ) R*H. Fischer Theology Grayston., at Chicago, 1977) pp-177-83. the New Testament" Ep. R 20975)
K. ITExorcism. in
pp. 90-4. The Significance ---'? -Testament" of the Word Hand in Bibliques the New en hommage au
M41E&2s
R. P. B6da-Rigaux ed. -A. Descamps and A. de Halleux (Duculot, Gembloux, 1970) pp. 479-87. Grelot., P. La Priere de Nabonide (4 Q Or Nab) RQ 90978)
.......... .... ... F, and Thompson. H. The Demotic . Magical . Papyrus Griffith., 9 ...................... . London Londong 1904-9). of and Leiden 3 Vols- (Grevel,
483-95. pp.
der kraft'inder
(Kohlhammerq
neutestament1932).
Stuttgart,
Gutwenger., Sicht"
Hadas.,
M. -and Smith.,
Biographies
ReG. "A Note on Matthew 9 Luke 11: 20" NTS 110964-5) pp. 167-9A. M. Lucian Loeb Classical Library (Heineman, Londong 1913-67)-
Harmon.,
Harriiigton., Liber
Marcan*Redaction't Hay.,.
Heil.,
J. P, "Significant in*Matthew"
Aspects
of the Healing
Miracles
CBQ 410979)
pp. 274-87Aspects of the ... ....... ... Period the pre-Christian in their Encounter Period
Hengel.,
M. Jewt,
In
the Early
Hellenistic
............ . Schneemelcher., W. Testament-Apocrypha New -'E. and (1959 and 1964, ET, SCM, London, 1973 and 1974). 2 Vols.
428 et jud4o-chretiens"
PP-305-08.
70954-5)
R. Ho Th6 Kingdom of God in the Synoptic Tradition (Florida University Press, Gainesville, 1970)I'Satan, Demons, and the Kingdom of God" SJT 270974) of Philo Studies, 1974-197511
J. R* "Zoroastrianism
Influence
Numdn 16(1969)
pp. 161-85.
Holladay., C. R. Theios Press, Aner in Hellenistic Missoula, Judaism 1977). the New Evans (Scholars Hooker.,
Testament?
9 in Honour
(SCM, London,
1975).
Hopfndr., To Griechisch.;. Agyptischer Offenbarungszauber 2 Vols. (Hassell Leipzig, 1921 and 1924). Hull., -'J*M. Hellenistic Magic and the Synoptic Tradition (SCMI London, 1974).
Hultgten., A. J. Jesus and His Conflict Adversaries Stories in The Form and the Synoptic 1979). pp. 127-34. Function'of'the Tradition Hunt.,
(Augsburg,
Minneapolis,
PBA 150929)
PP-155-7. "The Warren Magical Papyrus" in Studies Presented to F. Ll. dr*iff, ith. (Egypt Exploration Society, London, 1932) pp. 233-40. Huntress., - E. "Son of God' Era" in Jewish Writings PP-117-23LZ 15(1959) Prior to the Christian Huppenbauer., JBL 54(1935) in
H. W. "Belidl
den QumranteVten't
81 pp. -9.
Iersel., B. M. F. van 'Der Sohn' in Den Synoptischen (Brill, Leiden, 1964). jesumorten Ncv; T (SuPP-3)
1924).
The Religion
1898).
W.A' The Healing Gods-of Ancient Civilizations Jayne-,Univeresity Books Inc., New Yorkj 1962). Jeremias., J. Jerusalem 1969). Theology Vol. I The Proclamation 1971)(1970, ET9 SCM, London, in the Testaments pp. 182-235. of the Twelve Patriarchs: 1975). and the New , 1972)of'the of Jesus in the Time of Jesus (1967, ET9
Influence
and Interpretation
of the Trelve Patriarchs pp. 546-56. Texts Aramaic - 1976). of the Synoptic (Westminster,
SE 10959) al)
' Miden,
Miracles
(SPCK, London,
on'New Testament
Themes (1960,
ET,
SCM, London,
1964).
28(1979) Die Heilung der Reformatio 7-18. Besessenen" pp. t! Keck.; -L. E-* "Mark, 3: 7-12 and Mark's Christology1t JBL-84(1965) pp-;341-58. Kee., HOC. "Satang Magic, and Salvation in the Testament of Jobtf SBL 1974 Seminar Papers Vol. I (ed. ) GO McRae (SBL, -Cbmbridge, Mass. -, 1974) PP-53; -76. f? Thb Terminology of Mark's Fkorcism Stories" (19674) pp. 232-46. NTS 14
430 Keller.,
Kenyon.,
in Dispute:
1969). the British 1893).
A Continuing
Museum Vol. I
Debate, (1968,
(British Kertelge.,
Museum, London,
Eine
rdactinsgeschichtliche
.... King.,
MUnchen, 1970). I'Die Wunder Jesu in der Neueren Exegesell Th-B 50976) pp-71-105.
L. W. Babylonian Magic and SorcerZ Structure, (Luzac, London, *Kingdom 1896).
Kingsbury.,
J. D. Matthew: 1976).
Christoiogy,
(SPCK, London,
"Observations on the 'Miracle Chapters' of Matthew 8-91, CBQ400978) PP-559-73"The title in Matthew's Gospel" At 940975) 'Kyrios' pp. 246-55 Kirchschlffger., pp-135-53.
Klein., G, 'Mer Synkretismil Apg 19 11-20" als theologisches ZTK 64(1967) PP-5o-6o. Problem:
W. "Exorzismus
180976)
Knibb.,
of'Enoch 1978).
2 Vols.
der Wundererzffhlungen
des'Markusevangeliums 1975).
(de Gruyter,
New York,
Kraeling.,
Kuhn.,
C.H. "Was Jesus accused of Necromancy?" JBL 59 (1940) pp. 147-57H. WO Altere Sammlungen im, Markusevangelium G8ttingen, 1971)(Vandenhoeck
& Ruprecht,
The Eschatological and Fulfilment: Message of Jesus (1956, ET, SCM, Lonson, 1969)9 P. IIL6 Poss4dS de Ge'rasalt NRT 90(1968) PP-581-97-
Lamarche.,
431
Langdon., S. "An Incantation for Expelling Demons from a House" ZA 2(1925), Langton. pp. 209-14-. A Study of Jewish
E. Demonology: Essentials of t Doctrine Its Origin and Christian (Epworth, London, 1949). Spirits
C. "The Messianic
J; Z. * "Jesus iji the- Talmud" in his kainic I 1 ) pp. 473-. 570Essays (KTA. V, -New York, 1973,1951 R. "Dominical. Authority Healing" Ex. 65(1953-4) for the Ministry of
Leaney.,
PP. 121-3.
Leivestad.,
the Conqueror: Ideas of Conflict R. Christ .......... (SPCK, in Victory the New Testament London, 1954). and "Christ and Unclean Spirits" Theology 23(1931) antique 3 Vols. de llancien (G6uthner,
TjewiSo, E. L.
87-8. pp. Lexa., F. La magie aans 1'Egy pte empire Paris, Lindars., jusqu'A 1925); 1'Lfpoque -
copte
S. S. (eds. ) Christ Spirit and 9 in the New Testament (Cambridge University# B. and'Smalley. 1973)-
Cambridge,
(SPCK, Ling., -, T. The Significance London, 1961). Satan of Lohse., 'E. "Miracles in the Fourth Gospel" WANT pp. 64-75. (Brill, Loos., H. van der The Miracles Leiden, Jesus 1965)of McArthur., H. Wed. ) In Search 1970). 'Confessions' of Jesus" 1951). JBL 510932) of the Historical Jesus (SPCK, *Lbndon, McCasland7.,
(Macmillan, God of in
New York,
in Josephus-and
the Gospels"
pp-323-35.
"Religious Environmental J*T. McNeill, Healing in First Century Palestine" History (edsQ) Factors in'Christian
M. Spinka
and H. R. Willoughby'
(University
of Chicagor
Chicago,
432 McCasland., S. V. "Signs and Wonders" JBL 76(1957) pp. 149-52. McCown., C.C. "The-Christian Traditi6n*bLs to-the Magical Wisdomof-Solomon" JPOS20922) pp. 1-24. "The Ephesia Gr ta in Popular Belief" TPAPA 54 (1923) pp. 128-4o. .... .............. ... (Hinrich, Tdstament Solomon Leipzigq 1922)e of The McEleney.9 N. J. "Authenticating Criteria'and Mark 7: 1.;. 2311 340972) pp-431-60. I" VT 19 Ma. cintbsh,, -A. A. 'IIA Consideration of Hebrew'111 (1969) pp-471-9E. C.Be "Beelzebul" Nov,T 200978) pp. 156-60. MacRae., G. I'Mir&cld'in The Afttiquities-of Josephus" Miraclea PP-127-47-' Martin., A. D. "The Loss of the Godarene Swine" Exp.T 25 (1913-4) PP-38o-1. Maclaurin., Mastin., B. A. "Scaeva the Chief Priest" JTS 270976) pp. 40512. ... ........... I .... ....... .... ..... Mead., G.R.S. Apollonius Tyana: The Philosopherof . Reformer'of'the First'Cdntj . (University AD Books, ; ry New York, '1966). Metzger., --B.M. "Namesfor the Nameless in the New Tesiainent. -A Study in the Growth of Christian Tradition" Kyriakon: Festschrift Johannes Quasten (eds. ) P. -Granfield and J. A. Jungmann(Aschendorff, MtInster, Westfalen, 1970) Vol-I PP-79-99. "A Magical Amulet for Curing Fever" Historic and Literary Studies: Pagan', Jewish, and Christian (ed. ) B. Mi, Metzger (Brilli Lei4enj 1968) pp. 104-10. "St Paul and the Magicians" PSB 380944) pp. 27-3o. Meyer;, - P.W. "The Problem of the mebsiahic self-consciousness 40961) T Jesust"Nov. pp. 122-38. of
Milik., J. T. "_#Priere d6 Nab6nidelet .cycle*dd'Daniel. RB 630956) pp-407-15. d1un Fragments. Arameens de Qumran 4t, Autres 4crits
ll.,Z,z r,;. ol
Miyoshi.
M. Der Anfang Lk. 9i51-10: des Reiseberichts l (Biblical Institute, Rome, 1974).
Montefiore.,
C*J. G. and Loeweq, H. A Rabbinic Anthology: Selected'and Arranged With Comments and Introductions (Macmillan, London, 1938). C. J. G* Rabbinic London, Literature and Gospel Teahijs from Nippur 1913). (Macmillan,
Montefiore.,
1930).
Montgomery.
JAOS 310911)
Centuries (Harvard
Era,
(ed, ) Miracles. Cambridge Studies in their C, F, D, q (MOwbraysl Philosophy History London, 1965)and (William Moultonw, J. H. Early Zoroastrianism, and Norgate, London, 1913). "The IranianPP-257-60. Mussner., Nestld,, F. The Miracles (University of Notre E, "JildischeParallelen of Jesus: Dame, An Introduction Notre Dame, 1968). Background of Tolbit" Exp. T (1899-90)
zu neutestamentlichen Wundergesehichten" ZNW 80907) pp. 239-40. . ... . ... . ...... ... Neusner., J, From Politics The Emergence of to-Piety: Pharisaic N. J. Prentice Judaism (Englewood Cliffs, 1972), The Rabbinic 3 Vols. (Brill, Traditions Leiden, about the Plfarisees 1971). Current Events in 401-18. pp. Laying on of Hands" Before
Hall,
70
Studies"
434
Nilsson., M. P. Die Religion Lunc JEA 150929) of the-Old pp. 219-35Testament in den griechischen Zauberpapyri (Gleerup, Nock.
1,6, -18(1907)
PP-132-51-
..... ... and ... Other .... Possession T. K. Demoniacal 9 (1921, ET Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner, London, 1930)Ostere-, R*E. Jr. A Historical Commetary'on the*Missionary' ........... Success*Stori6s in Acts 19: 11-40 (Ph. D Thesis, Oesterreich.
Perrin.,
... of ........ ........ Kingdom N. The God in the Teaching.......... of Jesus (SCMi London, 1963).
Der Besessene von Gerasa (Katholisches Bibelwerk,
Peschtbi-R.
Stuttgdrtl'1972).
.......... ....... Jesu ureigene Tatem? Ein ... Beitrag Wunderfrage zur (Herder, Freiburg, Vienna', 1970),
"The Markan Version Demoniac" ER 230971) of th ,e pp. 349-76. Healing of the Gerasene.
Brother-of
nach den Wundertaten des Exorzismus pp. 18o-2o4. von Tyana und 1970),
Lk
Jesu,
Mark. IX
Leiden,
J-, P. M, van der llTn petit- r eau de pa=es a) (11 QpAp l' Tradition apocryphes und Glaube pp. 128-40.
Polhill.,
J, B, "Perspectives pp-389-99.
Ke "Die
on the Miracle
RE 740977)
Preisendanz.,
griechischen
und lateinischen
Zaubextoreln" AP 110935)
PP-153-64.
"Neue griechische-Zauberpapyrill Cd1E 260951) Pp-405-9. (ed. ) Papyri'Graecae Magicae: .Die kriechischen Zauberpapyri 3 Vols. (Teubner, Leipzig and. Berlin, 19289 1931,1942).
"Zur Uberlieferungsgeschichte der SpUtantiken Festgabe zum Leipzigl Magie" Aus Des Welt Des Buches: 70 Gebursta#
1950) PP-223-40. Reif., S, Ce "A Note on-13IJ 11VT 210971) Reiner,, E, "gurpu: A Colledtion Beiheft Incantations"-AO Reisn6r.,
pp. 241-1.
G. A. The Hearst'Medical
1905)Reitzenstdin., (Teubner, Poimandres: R. Hellenistische Leipzig, . Studien 1963)zur Literatur Griechis-Ilg-ytii; (Teubnqr, he'und Leipzig, 1904). New York, Wundererzghlungen_
Us From Evil
(Seabury,,
Exorcism, 1976).
Riga., P. "Signs
Deliverance.
and Healing
The Use of
(Grovel
Nottingham,
in
of Glory: 170963;
1S9meionl
St
John's
Gospel" Rist.,
Interp.
402-24. pp. Isaac, and Jacob: JBL 570938) in Mark A pp. 289-303. (SCM, London,
Formula" of History
Robinson., 1963).
J. Me The Problem *
The Cult of Souls and Belief in Among-the Greeks (1921, ET, Routledge & London, 1925) "-
(Sidgwick
des
& Jackson,
London, 1966).
Besessenen 11St. Th 17(1963)
H. trDie Perikope
vom gerasenischen
Markusevangelium
dan
Santo., Schenk.
de C. "The-Assumption
W. "Tradition
Gospel".
9 Perikope j
Schenke,
L, Die WundererzHhlungdn
des Markus-evaneliums
(Katholisches Schill6.,
Bibelwerkj
Stuttgart,
G. Die Urchristliche
Wundertradition:
Schmithals.,
Eine
von
(Neukirchen-Verlag,
Neukirchen-Vluyng
Josephus
zu Flavius
437
Schultz., We "Ephesia Grammata" Philologus 68(1909) pp., 210-28.
SchUrer.,
....
E. The History of the Jewish People in the Time (TO Christ Clark, Edinburgh, Vol. 1,19739 Vol-Ut of 1978).
the Jewish 1972). People in the Time'of Christ (Schocken, New York,
The Literature-of
Mrusalem
(Maisonneuvel*Paris,
'A. The Quest of the Historical ET, Black, London, 1910). Ee "Anmerkungen zur Theologie
Jesus
Neotestamefitica Leiden,
et Patristica
'odIs... "Towards a Christology " Mark? G Christ of and His ) People Studies in Honour of Nils Alstrup'Dahl(eds. Jacob Jervell and Wayne-A. Meeks (Universitetsforlaget, of Jesus" Oslov 1977) PP-29-42. Shae.,- G. S. "The Question on the Authority Nov. T. 16(1974) pp. 1-29. -
Skehan., P. W. '.11A Fragment of the 'Song of Moses' (Deut-32) From Qumr&nII-BASOR 136(1954)'PP-12-15. Testaments H, D. Patriarchs: the Twelve 'The of 9 (Scholars, Research A Critical'Histar''' Missoula, 1977), of Iy Smalley. i S. S. "Spirit, Kingdom.,and Prayer in Luke-Acts" Nov. T-15(1973) PP-59-71Slingerland. Smith-i, M Jesus the Magician Parties (Gollancz, and Politics Testament (Columbia Universityp London, 1971)"Prolegomena. to Discussion a , Man, the Gospels and Jesus" of Aretalogies, JBL 90(1971) Divine PP-174-99.
Palestinian
London, 1978). ... ...... Shaped that the .. Old New York &
Somerville.,
pp-550-1
438
Stantono , Starobinski. G. N. "On the Christology of Qtv CSNT pp. 27-42. Analysis 5: Mark 1-2011 in Literary J; Essay -IIAn -, PP-377-97in Mark 1: 2211 "The-meaning of Authority Methodology
ER 23(1971) Starr., J.
HTR'23(1930) Steizi.
R. H; "The Proper
'Redaktionsgeschichtlicht
pp-70-949
J. S. "On a Neglected Emphasis Theol(5gy" SJT 4(1941) pp. 292-301. H. L. -Introduction (19209 ET, Jewish Philadelphia, Publication ,
in New Testament
Strack.,
to the Talmud and Midrash Society of America, nach den Leipzig, 1910).
1931).
, Strack.,
H. L. ufid Billerbeck.
Testament
(Beck, MUnchenj 1922-61). Strugn611.1 J; "Flovius XVIII, Antiquities More Psalm Suhl., Taylor., Josephus and the Essenes: 18-221, JBL 770958) pp. 10.6-15-
of' tDavidIIICBQ*27(1965) pp. 207-16. A. IrDer Dxvidssohn im Matthgus-Evangelium" PP-57-81. B, E, "Acts 19: 14!1 Exp. T 57(1945-6)
ZNW590968)
p. 2M. Taylor., V. "The Original-Order of Q'I New Testament Essays: Studies'in Memory of T. W. Manson (ed. ) A. J. B. Higgins (Manchester University, Manchester, 1959) pp. 246-69. and the Jews
Loeb Classical 1929-65)Ein Beitrag
Tcherikover., V. Hellenistic Civilization (Atheneiim, New York,. 1977)Thackeray. 9 Library II. St. J. 9 Vols. (et ) Josephus al. -Minemann, , London,
Theissen., zur
G. Urchristliche formgeschichtlichen
Wundergeschichten: Erforschung
Spirits-
of Babyl
-T-ondon, 1903-4).
Magic: Its
London,
1908).
of the Magicians and Astrologers (Luzac, London, 1900). 2 Vols. on the Composition Figure as Miracle of
there a Marcan Christology? " CSNTPP-3-13C. H; "'Markan Usage: Notes Critical'and Exegetical, PP-377-851 26(1925)
N. A Grammar of New Testament Greek Vol. 1V (TO Clark, 'Style' 1976). Edinburgh, Minor Verbal Agreements pp-223-34. of Mt. and Lk. Against
"Me
Mark" SE 10959)
of the Disciples
in Mark"
in the Book
pp. 261-8.
Studies 1977). DUJ 520960) pp. 97-
Vermes.,
115.
The Dead Sea Scrolls 1975).
The Dead Sea Scrolls:
(Collins,
in English
(Penguin,
Harmondsworth,
Post-Biblical
8-29. pp. "Hanina ben Dosa'? 'JJS PP-51-64. (Collinsl the Jesus Jew -; -VUgtl6.1 A. "Thd Miracles Background" Philadelphia,
230973)
pp-28-50,2-40973)
Jesus and His Time (1966. ET, Fortress, 1971)(ed. )H. J. Schultz pp. 96-105.
44o
Walker., W.O. "A Method for on Functional Identifying Redactional Passages in Matthe* and Linguistic Grounds"
CBQ-39(1977) P15-76-93.
Wansbrbugh.; H '."Mark 3: 21 - Was Jesus out of his mind? " . NTS 18(1971-2) PP-23-5"Jesus' Opponents in the Gospel of4 Mark" JBR-34(1966)'pp. 214-22. Weederf.9 T. Je "The Heresy that Necessitated Mark's Gospel" ZNW590968) pp. 145-58. (Fortress, Philadelphia, in Conflict Mark Traditions ,. 1971).
Weinreicho, Oo Antike Heilungswunder. Untersuchungen zum Wunderglauben Giessen,, 1909). der Griechen (TUpelmann, R8mer und
Wetter.,
-
GottinSen, 111/6). & Ruprecht, ... .... ... ... .. Whiteo, i A. N. S Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament (Clarendon, Oxford, 1963). Wiedemann., (Grevell Wilkifison.., Ao Religion. London, Jo-IThe of the Ancient 1897)Case of the Bent Woman in Luke 13: 10-17" Boy" Exp. T 79(1967-8) Egyptians
EQ 490977)
ppol95-205o
PP-39-42.
William ., (SPCK, New York & Toronto, A. L. Justin Martyr: The Dialogue 1930)With Trypho
Winst6n-0, 'D. --IIThe Iranian ApocryphiL ER 50965-6) Witt*', Isis E. --R. Londonl*1971)-" and'Qumran:
pp. 183-216.
441
Wundt., WUnsch., M. "Apollonius Wed. 49(1906) Tyana ZWT PP-3og-66. von ) Antike fluchtafdln--(Markus und Weber,, Pergamon (Reimerg Berlin, 1905).
J. E. I'Luke! s. Pneumatology
-,, -The'Spirit-and-the Yates., R. "Jesus and the Demonic in IN Zeitl='-*,, 44(1977) pp-39-57. S "Th6 Account
the Synoptic
Philosophumenall
and the
z 0 A0No