jkk@aiai.ed.ac.uk (John Kingston) (04/05/91)
It is misleading to talk about "demon possession" -- "demonised" is a better word. This may seem a trivial point, but it has important consequences. The word in Greek which is translated "demon-possessed" is "daimonaizai" (sp?). A better translation of this word is "demon-influenced", or "demonised". In other words, it's not that a person either has a demon, or doesn't; it's more a continuum, from no demon influence to total demon influence. Some Biblical justification can be found in Luke 4.39 where Peter's mother-in-law has a fever, and Jesus "rebukes" the fever, which then leaves her. The word "rebuke" is the same Greek word as is used when Jesus "rebukes" the demon in the man in the temple (Luke 4.35) and the demon in the boy with fits (Luke 9.42). It looks as if the fever was caused by a demon - perhaps scoring 2 on a scale of 0 (no influence) to 10 (Gadarene demoniac)? The importance of this is: 1/ Christians can be demon-influenced. Many people argue that a Christian cannot be demon-possessed, and it may be that total demonic control (10 out of 10) is impossible in a body where the Holy Spirit lives. But lesser degrees of influence do happen. Peter's mother in law was presumably a Christian. 2/ Demon influence can grow steadily and almost imperceptibly in a person. It's by no means certain that a person can always tell when they are demonised. Before too many readers go on a self-demon-purge austerity weekend, I should make two further points: 1/ Just because you're tempted to do or think things you shouldn't doesn't mean you're demonised. Every Christian encounters temptation -- yes, even temptations as powerful as the ones *you* sometimes get. Jesus was tempted in every way we were (Hebrews 4. 15). 2/ Demon influence most often gets into someone's life through involvement in the occult (so I'm told :-)), although there are other ways in. I'm also told that most people who are worried that they might be demonised actually aren't. If you haven't been involved in the occult, it's less likely that you are demon-influenced. If you have, it's best to find someone to pray with you -- someone who's encountered this sort of problem before -- just to free you from anything that might be hanging on. (You need to repent of your involvement first). God bless! John K. John Kingston, AI Applications Institute, University of Edinburgh, 80 South Bridge, Edinburgh EH1 1HN, Scotland E-mail jkk@uk.ac.ed.aiai, phone 031-650 2736 FAX: 031 226 2730 Arpanet: J.Kingston%ed.ac.uk@nfsnet-relay.ac.uk TELEX: 727442 UNIVED G
tom@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com (Tom Albrecht) (04/06/91)
In article <Apr.5.03.21.49.1991.9655@athos.rutgers.edu> jkk@aiai.ed.ac.uk (John Kingston) writes: > >Some Biblical justification can be found in Luke 4.39 where >Peter's mother-in-law has a fever, and Jesus "rebukes" the fever, which >then leaves her. The word "rebuke" is the same Greek word as is used when >Jesus "rebukes" the demon in the man in the temple (Luke 4.35) and the >demon in the boy with fits (Luke 9.42). It looks as if the fever was caused >by a demon - perhaps scoring 2 on a scale of 0 (no influence) to 10 >(Gadarene demoniac)? Sorry, I think you're reading too much into one Greek word. Jesus rebuked demons as well as His own disciples (Luke 9:55). The same word is used by Jesus when He "rebuked" the wind in Luke 8:24. Are you suggesting that there was a demon in the wind? Doesn't this border on a sort of pantheism? I'm sorry, none of these passage suggest that a child of God can be "possessed" by a demon. I would even argue that the idea of demon-influence is a bit far fetched. After all, "greater is He that is in you, than he that is in the world." We give Satan too much credit, and Christ too little, when it comes to the care and nuture of the Child of God. -- Tom Albrecht
jkk@aiai.ed.ac.uk (John Kingston) (04/14/91)
Someone replied to my original article, suggesting that the use of the word "rebuke" (Greek "epitimao") [often used when Jesus rebuked demons] when Jesus rebuked the fever in Peter's mother in law did not necessarily indicate demonic influence. The reason given was that Jesus also rebuked his disciples. In fact, Jesus only uses "epitimao" to his disciples twice, and on one of those occasions there was clearly demonic influence involved - "Get behind me, Satan!" (the other occasion was when James and John wanted to call down fire from heaven). For the record, Jesus also "rebuked" a number of evil spirits, and the wind. I stick by my assertion that the fever in Peter's mother in law was due to demonic influence, and that this provides evidence from the Bible (there is empirical evidence too) that Christians can be demonically influenced. JK John Kingston, AI Applications Institute, University of Edinburgh, 80 South Bridge, Edinburgh EH1 1HN, Scotland E-mail jkk@uk.ac.ed.aiai, phone 031-650 2736 FAX: 031 226 2730 Arpanet: J.Kingston%ed.ac.uk@nfsnet-relay.ac.uk TELEX: 727442 UNIVED G [Many interpreters believe that "get behind me Satan" does not indicate actual possession, but simply that Peter is tempting Jesus as Satan did. --clh]