Matthew 8:28-34
28 When he arrived at the other side in the region of the Gadarenes,[c] two demon-possessed men coming from the tombs met him. They were so violent that no one could pass that way. 29 “What do you want with us, Son of God?” they shouted. “Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?”
30 Some distance from them a large herd of pigs was feeding. 31 The demons begged Jesus, “If you drive us out, send us into the herd of pigs.”
32 He said to them, “Go!” So they came out and went into the pigs, and the whole herd rushed down the steep bank into the lake and died in the water.33 Those tending the pigs ran off, went into the town and reported all this, including what had happened to the demon-possessed men. 34 Then the whole town went out to meet Jesus. And when they saw him, they pleaded with him to leave their region.
Questions:
ReplyDelete- Is there a appointed time for the demons to be tortured?
- Why is there two men here in Matthew and only one in the other gospels? Is it the same story?
- Why drive the demons out into the herd of pigs?
My 2 cents on the torture of demons:
ReplyDeleteWow, the kooks came out of the woodwork when attempting to look this one up. I gave up.
I speculate that the demon was referring to Judgement Day, or (less likely) was referring to what Jesus would do when He died and rose.
I further speculate that torture is something that is on the mind of demons. That they think of interactions between others as torturing or being tortured. (This would match what I think extremely depraved people are like). Given that speculation, I would say that if the speculation is possible, then the demon is talking about any interaction it will have with Jesus in the future - and not necessarily accurate about what Jesus may do to it (whether throw it in hell, destroy it, judge it, steal captives from it, etc.)
http://www.gotquestions.org/one-two-demoniacs.html says about two men:
ReplyDeleteAnswer: The three passages that describe the incident with the demoniacs in the country of the Gerasenes, also called Gadarenes, are Matthew 8:28-34, Mark 5:1-20, and Luke 8:26-39. The Matthew account mentions two demon-possessed men, while Mark and Luke only mention one. Is there a discrepancy in these accounts, and do the Gospel writers contradict one another?
The first thing to determine is whether the three writers are describing the same event. The timing of the event in all three accounts—immediately following the calming of the storm on the sea of Galilee—as well as other similarities (living in the tombs, the ferocity of the demoniac, the conversation with the demons, the driving of them into the pigs, the drowning of the herd, and the response of those who witnessed the scene) all give credence to Matthew, Mark, and Luke all describing the same event. The question remains, then, whether there was one demoniac or two.
Matthew tells us there were two demoniacs, while Mark and Luke only mention one of the two. It is unclear why they chose to mention only one, but that does not negate the possibility of a second demoniac being present. Mark and Luke do not say there was “only one” demon-possessed man. They simply state that one of the two met Jesus and spoke to Him. For whatever reason, Matthew simply gives us more information than Mark and Luke.
In any case, no contradiction exists. A contradiction occurs only if one statement makes the other impossible and there is absolutely no way for them to be reconciled. For example, let's say we put two apples on a table. Statement 1: There are two apples on the table. Statement 2: There is only one apple on the table. These two statements contradict each other. Now read these two statements: Statement 1: There are two apples on the table. Statement 2: There is an apple on the table. These two statements do not contradict each other. In the same way, the biblical accounts do not represent a contradiction. All three accounts describe demon possession and the power that Jesus has over the spirit world. All three tell us that He made a point to cross the sea to save someone from the demons. All three affirm that there was at least one man who was plagued by demons. The fact that the three accounts differ in some minor details only proves that they were written by three different authors, each of whom chose to focus on a different aspect of the account.
https://bible.org/seriespage/11-demons-and-pigs-matthew-828-34 says about the two men:
ReplyDeleteThe so-called “synoptic gospels,” Matthew, Mark and Luke, often record the same events but slightly differently. Besides our passage in Matthew, this account is reported in Mark 5:1-20 and Luke 8:26-39, both of which are longer than Matthew’s account. It is important for the Bible Study to compare the passages when studying in one of them for several reasons: 1) to see if there are possible discrepancies that need to be addressed, 2) to gather more information about the event to safeguard the interpretation, and 3) to be able to understand why one gospel writer used only the bits that he did.
First, then, are there apparent discrepancies between the accounts? There are two matters that need to be dealt with. One is the fact that Matthew says that two men met Jesus and the other accounts say one met Him. Some interpreters rather quickly conclude that Matthew simply got it wrong, or invented the second man. Others think that it must be a different event, only remarkably similar. But neither of these explanations is necessary or helpful. The better solution is that Matthew, who was there, had full and separate knowledge of a second man.1_ftn1 There were two demon possessed men. But one of them spoke to Jesus; and the other two gospel writers simply report what they had been told—the conversation between Jesus and the demon-possessed man. Their focus on one man was sufficient for their purpose. Matthew will do the same thing in Matthew 20:30 where he reports two blind men who met Jesus.
Besides, where one person is more remarkable, it is not uncommon to mention that one alone. One could say, “I met John downtown today,” and later add that his family was with him. This would not be considered poor reporting.
https://bible.org/seriespage/11-demons-and-pigs-matthew-828-34 says about the two men (continued):
ReplyDeleteThe second difficulty is the name of the place. Matthew says it was in the region of the Gadarenes. Mark and Luke say it was in the area of Gerasa. Some of the older Bibles had Gergesa, but that was based on a later manuscript tradition.
Gadara is most likely Um Qeis, about five miles to the southeast of the lake. Josephus, the Jewish historian from the first century, says that Gadara had village settlements on the border of the lake. Remember too that these men lived in the tombs, and they would most likely be outside the city area. This is why Matthew says it was “in the region” of the Gadarenes, not in Gadara.
Mark and Luke say it was in the area of Gerasa. Some have suggested that this would be the city of Jerash. But that is thirty miles to the east, and would not fit the circumstances of the story which took place on the shore of the lake.2_ftn2 Most likely Gerasa is a reference to the village settlement of Koursi, or Kersi, located on the eastern side of the lake. The location in Matthew overlaps with this location; the two names in the gospels simply identify it differently, Matthew with reference to the main town, and the other two with reference to the local village. The area where the miracle took place was in the tomb area outside cities and villages, and could be located either way.
So what looks like some mistakes on a superficial reading really are not such at all. They can be explained easily enough by considering the perspective of the different reporters. But this passage makes us aware of something very important about studying the Bible. If you go into it with the idea that the Bible is filled with irreconcilable errors and falsifications, you can find things like this that you could explain to make your point. But if you go into the study with the idea that these are careful recorders and interpreters of history and with the intent of harmonizing difficulties, you can find reasonable explanations for what appear to be discrepancies. Too many people do not put forth the effort to see if these things can be harmonized. A fundamental rule of literary criticism is that if you find an apparent error in a good author, you assume yourself ignorant until you have exhausted all possible explanations. Too many modern “scholars” do not want to assume themselves ignorant; rather, they assume they know more than the writers
Besides, where one person is more remarkable, it is not uncommon to mention that one alone. One could say, “I met John downtown today,” and later add that his family was with him. This would not be considered poor reporting.
The second difficulty is the name of the place. Matthew says it was in the region of the Gadarenes. Mark and Luke say it was in the area of Gerasa. Some of the older Bibles had Gergesa, but that was based on a later manuscript tradition.
Gadara is most likely Um Qeis, about five miles to the southeast of the lake. Josephus, the Jewish historian from the first century, says that Gadara had village settlements on the border of the lake. Remember too that these men lived in the tombs, and they would most likely be outside the city area. This is why Matthew says it was “in the region” of the Gadarenes, not in Gadara.
https://bible.org/seriespage/11-demons-and-pigs-matthew-828-34 says about the two men (continued):
ReplyDeleteMark and Luke say it was in the area of Gerasa. Some have suggested that this would be the city of Jerash. But that is thirty miles to the east, and would not fit the circumstances of the story which took place on the shore of the lake.2_ftn2 Most likely Gerasa is a reference to the village settlement of Koursi, or Kersi, located on the eastern side of the lake. The location in Matthew overlaps with this location; the two names in the gospels simply identify it differently, Matthew with reference to the main town, and the other two with reference to the local village. The area where the miracle took place was in the tomb area outside cities and villages, and could be located either way.
So what looks like some mistakes on a superficial reading really are not such at all. They can be explained easily enough by considering the perspective of the different reporters. But this passage makes us aware of something very important about studying the Bible. If you go into it with the idea that the Bible is filled with irreconcilable errors and falsifications, you can find things like this that you could explain to make your point. But if you go into the study with the idea that these are careful recorders and interpreters of history and with the intent of harmonizing difficulties, you can find reasonable explanations for what appear to be discrepancies. Too many people do not put forth the effort to see if these things can be harmonized. A fundamental rule of literary criticism is that if you find an apparent error in a good author, you assume yourself ignorant until you have exhausted all possible explanations. Too many modern “scholars” do not want to assume themselves ignorant; rather, they assume they know more than the writers
(There is a lot more in this article talking about the pigs and a lot of other things. It may be worth reading yourselves)
http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-demons-pigs.html says about the demons going into the pigs:
ReplyDeleteThe Bible doesn’t explain to us Jesus’ reasoning, but displaying His sovereign power over demons could be one reason why Jesus sent them into the pigs. If the pigs’ owners were Jews, Jesus could have been rebuking them for violating Mosaic law which forbids Jews from eating or keeping unclean animals such as swine (Leviticus 11:7). If the swineherds were Gentiles, perhaps Jesus was using this miraculous event to show them the malice of evil spirits under whose influence they lived, as well as displaying His own power and authority over creation. In any case, the owners were so terrified to be in the presence of such spiritual power that they made no demand for restitution for the loss of their property and begged Jesus to leave the region. The people were awe-struck but unrepentant—they wanted no more of Jesus Christ. This shows the hardness of their hearts and their desire to remain in sin. The healed demoniac, on the other hand, demonstrated the true faith and repentance of a changed heart and begged to be allowed to follow Jesus. Perhaps the unmistakable difference between the saved and the unsaved was an object lesson for the disciples and all who witnessed the event. Jesus sent the healed man away, giving him a commission that he joyfully obeyed: "Go home to your family and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you"
http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/427/does-jesus-show-compassion-to-demons-in-mark-512-13 says more about the pigs and demons:
ReplyDeleteJesus hadn't been operating in that country and it doesn't seem like the people knew who he was or what he was capable of. So I read their fear as arising from not knowing what happened to the powerful demons. Like going into a haunted house and everything suddenly gets quiet, the fear actually increases in that situation. But the people soon learned what had happened to the demons (Mark 5:16-17 ESV):
And those who had seen it described to them what had happened to the demon-possessed man and to the pigs. And they began to beg Jesus to depart from their region.
Now it seems that the man was able to live a more normal life after that. At least part of the reason might be that everyone knew his demons were destroyed. There was a considerable economic cost, but the blame for that seems to have rested solely on Jesus. When Jesus summarized the incident, he emphasized the Lord's mercy toward the man (Mark 5:19 ESV):
“Go home to your friends and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you.”
A passage in Luke 11:24-26 (ESV) seems to be related to this incident:
“When the unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it passes through waterless places seeking rest, and finding none it says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when it comes, it finds the house swept and put in order. Then it goes and brings seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter and dwell there. And the last state of that person is worse than the first.”
Perhaps the demons were trying to avoid passing through "waterless places".