Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

NEW TESTAMENT. *** IRST of all, I will endeavour Foto explain and establish the

true meaning of demoniacs

in the New Testament: In the next place, attempt to solve the several objections that have been urged against that explication:

And then point out the advantages of it, and the inconveniences attending the common interpretation of this subject.

CHA P.

C HOA P. I. I Will endeavour to explain and estaIblish the true meaning of demoniacs in the New Testament.

Whatever is necessary to our forming a juft idea of the gospel-demoniacs, will be comprized under the ten following propositions.

SECT. I. Prop. I. The spirits that were thought to take posseffion of men's bodies, are called in the New Teftament demons, not devils. - The Greek word" from whence comes the English name, devil, when used in the fingular number in the New Testament, 'is generally supposed to refer to one particular evil spirit”, the chief of the fallen angels: but, at the fame

[ocr errors]

· Arabonos.

& In the following passages, Matt. iv. 1. chap. **V. 41. Acts x. 33. ch. xiii. 10. Ephef. vi. 11. Jam, iv. 7. 1 Pet. 1.8. Rev. xii.. .

time, it must be allowed by all, that, even according to the tranNation now in use, when the fame Greek word occurs in the plural number, it is never applied to any evil spirits". Indeed, we often meet with the term devils in the English transation ;- but, in all these ina ftances, that of demons is used in the original. Strange as it may seem; it is nevertheless an undoubted fact, that there is not a single passage in the New Testament, in which the devil or devils are spoken of, in reference to the present.subject k. Though polefed persons are so very frequently mentioned in the Gol

" It occurs only in the following passages : Their wives muft benot Panderers, (ruesi doa bóngs, not devils) i Tim. iï. 11. In the last times, men will be (drabonos, devils) false accusers, 2 Tim. iii. 3. In like manner, in Tit. ií. 3. aged women are forbidden to be (osabórrs, devils) fülse accusers.

i Axiloves, dospeovizo ..

k That A&s x. 38. is no exception "will be Thewn below, feet, V.

'In describing persons possessed, the word 'Skipévsor occurs in the Gospels fifty-two times ; Saipour

pels, pels, they are not, on any occasion' whate ever, said to have, or to be posseffed by the devil. They are uniformly and invariably described as having, or being porn fessed by, a demon or demons. Beelzebub is called the prince of demons ", not of devils. It would therefore be foreign from our present subject to enquire who the devil is..... .. in

It is indeed commonly apprehended, that demons and their prince are the very same spirits as the devil and his angels. In support of this opinion, the abettors of it argue in the following manner: “ Satan and Beelzebub are “ names for the same person : for when

three ; and dagprovizopor, thirteen ; though doci bolos doth not occur so much as once in reference to possessions, either in the Gospels, or in any other part of the New Testament. '

m Mat. xii. 24. Mark iii. 12.

" See Pegge's Answer to Sykes, and the learned Dr. Doddridge on Mat. xii. 25. Fam. Expof. vol. I., p. 372, note g, and also vol. II. p. 82, note 6, 2d edit.

“ Christ was reproached with casting out " demons by the affiftance of the prince " of demons, he replied, How can Saten cast out Satano? Now, if Satans “ who is considered as the fame perfon “ with the devil , was the prince of those “ demons who were cast ont by Chrift; "then demons are the same spirits as the " devil's angels. And on this fuppofi a tion, there can be no other difference " between demons and the devil, than " that which fubfifts between a prince “ and his fubjects, who both partake of " one common nature, though the prince, " as presiding over the rest, hath a pe“ culiar name of his own." It is observe able, that Dr. Sykes, who maintained that demons and their prince were a different order of fpirits from the devil and his angels, never replied to this objection, though frequently urged against him .Mat. xii. 26. Mark iii. 26. Luke xi, 18.

? Rev. ix, 12. compare Matt. iv. i, with Mark

« PoprzedniaDalej »