height of his distraction, as well as for the other reason just now mentioned, continued the conversation, and asked him, "What is thy name?" He answered, like a madman, who thought himself possessed with a multitude of demons, or that he was one of the number, "My name is legion; for we are many," more than six thousand. He could not know that he was pos sessed by a single demon, much less that he was pos sessed by a vast multitude of demons; but he spoke what his disorder suggested; and either fancied himself to be a legion of demons, or to be actuated by a le gion. He confounds himself with those spirits under whose influence he supposed himself to speak and act. Just at this instant, as his eyes wandered, he diseerned at some distance a herd of swine; and, agreeably to the false apprehensions he had of himself, said, "If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine." A strange request for an immaterial being, a pure spirit, and one of celestial origin, to make! but not at all unsuitable to the character of a madman, that fancied himself to be, or that spoke in the name of, au unclean spirit, who, next to tombs defiled by the bodies of dead men, could find out no habitation more unclean, or more conformable to his ideas of himself, than the body of a swine†. Were * This question, in any other view than that here pointed out, seems liable to many other objections besides those mentioned by Rousseau in the Introduction. Would Christ ask the devil his name? In what language did he expect an answer? For whose information could that answer be designed? See above, p. 155. +Cum putarent se immundos esse spiritus, non potuerunt aptius domicilium Were it possible to find out a rational meaning for every thing said by the demoniac, even this would not prove that he spoke by the suggestion of the devil: for madmen sometimes say things surprisingly just, which is far from being the case with this demoniac, whose whole conduct seems to me to correspond precisely to that of a mere madman, under those impressions which he had received from education, and the information he gained in the intervals of his sanity. But the truth is, that interpreters, to support a favourite hypothesis, ascribe to him sense and sagacity more than human, though the history itself will warrant us to pronounce him disordered in his understanding; and they force a rational construction upon the very circumstances, which seem to have been mentioned by the evangelists with no other view than to illustrate his insanity, 4. It hath been alleged, that demoniacs discovered more than human strength. This allegation is chiefly supported by the case of the demoniac under the foregoing article, who had been often bound with chains and fetters, and had as often broken them*. The antients, perhaps, were less skilful than the moderns in the methods of confining such unhappy persons; and who is ignorant that mere madmen discover very amazing strength†, from an extraordinary flow of animal spirits, or from some other cause, especially in the domicilium sibi eligere post sepulchra quam porcos.” Jalkut Rubeni f.0 2. "Anima idololatrarum quæ venit a spiritu immundo, vocatur porcus Wetstein on Matt. viii. 31. *Mark v. 3,4. " † Cassii Problem. 61. “ Cur phrenetici et fur'osi in paroxysmis robustiores sunt, viresque habent auctas?" Wetstein on Matt. viii. p. 355. most most violent paroxysms of their disorder? But so great is the force of prejudice, as to make the plainest symptoms of a natural disease, proofs of the interposition of superior beings. I cannot conclude this section without taking notice of the case of the demoniac at Ephesus, who is thought to have given proofs both of power and knowledge more than human. To the Jewish exorcists, who "took upoh them to call over those that had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus," the evil spirit (that is, the man who was supposed to be possessed by him*) said, "Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?" The historian adds, "And the man in whom the evil spirit was, leapt upon them, and overcame themt." Before this event, St. Paul, for the space of two years, had cured all sorts of diseases, and ejected demons, in the name of Jesus, at Ephesus: how then could this demoniac be ignorant either of Jesus or Paul? Moreover, the demoniac finding that certain Jewish impostors vainly pretended to the power of expelling demons, and fancying himself to be a demon, or possessed by one, his indignation and rage (accelerating the motion of his blood and spirits) supplied him with new strength, and he assaulted and vanquished the exorcists, who were not prepared to make a defence, and were disgraced and dispirited by the public detection of their imposture. The disappointment and disgrace of these magicians served to vindicate the * We have here a new proof, that the demon or evil spirit is sometimes put for the demoniac. See above, p. 149, &c. + Acts xix. 10-17. credit of St. Paul's miracles, to create a high reverence of Jesus, in confirmation of whose divine authority they were performed, and to deter others from profaning his sacred name, by using it only as a charm*. The more carefully I examine the language and behaviour of the New Testament demoniacs, the more difficult doth it appear to me to draw from them a proof of the reality of demoniacal possessions. I cannot discover in them clear and certain marks of the interposition of any superior agents, much less of infernal spirits, who certainly could have no great zeal to assert the honour of their enemy and avenger. In a word, if you will ascribe the conduct of the demoniacs to the agency of demons, you must allow that the latter acted out of character, and were as mad as the demoniacs themselves could be. * Hence it appears, that if this demoniac were assisted by a supernatural power, this assistance must have proceeded from God, not from the evil spirit, who could have no other aim than to lessen the credit both of our Saviour and his apostle. Nor could a display of the power of the demon, on this occasion, produce any other effect than creating a suspicion in the people that Jesus and Paul were confederates with himself. If with this malicious view he was willing to bear testimony to Christ, what occasion was there for his being compelled to bear it by God? and would God favour his malicious views? The occurrence related seems to have been providentially designed to bring disgrace upon the Jewish exorcists, and thereby to answer the purposes mentioned above. SECTION SECTION II. A FURTHER argument in favour of real possessions is taken from the destruction of the herd of swine, which the demons are said to have entered, and stimulated to instantaneous madness*. This case is considered by some as a decisive proof of the power of demons, both over the human and brutal race, and is thought even to have been purposely designed by Providence to convince us of this principle, and to refute the opposite opinion. To enervate this argument, Dr. Sykes suggested t, and Dr. Lardner strenuously contended, that "the swine were frighted by the two madmen, and so driven down the precipice into the sea.". On the other hand, the advocates of the common hypothesis insist upon it, (to my apprehension, with great reason,) that it was impossible for two men, however fierce, to put so vast a herd of swine as two thousand into motion in an instant, and to cause them all to rush with violence down a precipice into the sea; swine, contrary to the nature of most other animals, running different ways when they are driven §. But this part of the controversy might well * Matt. viii. 30. Mark v. 11. Luke viii. 32. + Inquiry, p. 52. Case, p. 17. 101. and Remarks on Dr. Ward, p. 17. $ Not to add, that it was next to impossible that these two men should overcome all those who tended the swine; especially as, in order to compass the herd, they must have separated from each other. And indeed had they, under the influence of their disorder, driven the swine into the sea, it is strange that they did not follow them there. be |