An Essay on the Demoniacs of the New Testament

An objection answered, ib. Beelzebub, the prince of the possess-
ing demons, different from the devil, p. 9. The term satan appli-
cable to the former, ib.

SECT. II.

PROP II. By demons, whenever the word occurs in reference to

possessions, either in the Scriptures or other antient writings, we

are to understand, not fallen angels, but the Pagan deities, such of

them as had once been men, p. 13. Demons used in this sense,

1. By the Heathens, particularly the Greeks and Romans, p. 13.

2. By the Jews, p. 18. By the Pharisees in particular, when they

objected to Christ, that he cast out demons by Beelzebub, (whose

name is explained at large, and who is shown to be one of the Hea-

then demons,) p 19, and by Josephus, p. 24. 3. By Christ and his

apostles, p. 25. 4. And by the primitive Christians, p. 28. By Jus-

tin Martyr, ib. How it came to pass that the Fathers, after his

time, and Chrysostom in particular, referred possessions to celestial

demons, p. 29, note +. Of the spirit of Python or Apollo, with

which the damsel at Philippi was thought to be possessed, p. 33-4,

SECT. III.

PROP. III. Those demons who were thought to take possession of

men's bodies, were, it is probable, considered by the Jews as evil

beings, p. 35. As such they were regarded by the Heathens and

by Josephus, ib. and yet not considered as fallen angels, p. 38.

Whether the epithets of evil and unclean, deaf and dumb, given them

by the Evangelists, express their personal qualities, or the effects they

were supposed to produce, p. 36.

A 2

SECT.

SECT. IV.

PROP. IV. The persons who are spoken of as having demons, suf-

fered real and violent disorders, from whatever cause those disor-

ders proceeded, p 38.

SECT. V.

PROP. V. The particular disorders which the antients, whether

Heathens or Jews, ascribed to the possession of demons, were such

only as disturbed the understanding, p. 41. A distinction to be

made between diseases supernatur: by flicted and possessions, ib. Of

being oppressed by the devil, Acts x. 38, p. 44. and bound by salun,

Luke xiii 11, 16, p. 45. Possession included in it the idea of mad-

ness, amongst the Latins, p. 46; the Greeks, p. 47; the Jews, p. 50;

and other Eastern people, p. 51. That all the possessed were mad,

proved from the dramatic writings of the ancients, p. 52. All dis-

orders of the understanding were not ascribed to possession, ib.

The epilepsy ascribed to this cause, p. 53.

SECT. VI.

PROP. VI. The demoniacs spoken of in the New Testament were all

either madmen or epileptics, p 54. This proved from the Jews"

reproaching Christ with having a demon, p. 55, and Beelzebub,

p. 57; from the similar reproach they cast upon John the Baptist,

ib.; and from the description of the Gadarene demoniac, p. 59.

Mary Magdalene's seven demons understood by Celsus as expres-

sive of her phrensy, p. 62. The Pythoness at Philippi was a raving

prophetess, ib. Epilepsy ascribed to possession, and on what ac-

count, p. 64 The general idea which the antients had of demo-

niacs, p 65. The account here given of the New Testament de-

moniacs cleared from the objections of Dr. Lardner, p. 66. This

account justifies the representation before made of demoniacs, as

persons that laboured under real disorders, p. 70. Shows upon

what grounds possessions are distinguished from diseases in general,

and from lunacies in particular, ib.; and for what reason, madness

and epileptic fits rather than other disorders are ascribed to posses-

sion, p 74. Lastly, it is confirmed by the view given us of the de-

moniacs in the Christian church, who were all either mad, melan-

choly, or epileptic persons, p. 74.

SECT. VII.

PROP VII. Demoniacal possessions (whether they are supposed to

be real or imaginary), and the disorders imputed to them, were not

peculiar to the country of Judea, and the time of Christ; nor doth

it appear that they abounded more in that country, or at that time,

than any other, p. 76. The reasons invented to account for their

abounding in the age of the Gospel, ib. The fact disproved by nu-

merous testimonies, p. 79.

SECT.

SECT. VIII.

PROP. VIII. The demoniacs of the New Testament are not different

from those mentioned in other antient authors; and a like judgement

is to be formed of both, p 84. The bishop of Gloucester's attempt

to make a distinction between them, considered, p. 85.

SECT. IX.

PROP. IX. There is no sufficient evidence from reason for the re-

ality of demoniacal possessions; nay, reason strongly remon-

strates against it, p. 89. No natural evidence of the spirits of

dead men having power to enter the bodies of the living, ib. The

disorders imputed to possession may proceed from natural causes,

p. 95. Who first invented the doctrine of possessions, 92. By

whom it hath been rejected, ib. Disorders deemed demoniacal do

proceed from natural causes, p. 94, and are cured by natural re-

medies, p. 96. Are inconsistent with the order of the natural

world, p. 98, and with the wisdom and goodness of God, p. 99.

The absurdity and danger of allowing that men are in the power

of superior and malevolent spirits, ib.

SECT. X.

PROP. X. The doctrine of demoniacal possessions, instead of being

supported by the Jewish or Christian revelation, is utterly sub-

verted by both, p. 102. I. This doctrine was not originally founded

on revelation; neither taught nor referred to by the antient pro-

phets, ib. Saul's evil spirit explained, p. 103. On what occasions

the mention of possessions might have been expected in the Old

'Testament, had this doctrine been revealed under that dispensa-

tion, ib. It was generally entertained before the age of the Gospel,

p. 105, but never received the sanction of Christ or his apostles,

p. 107. II. It is inconsistent with the fundamental principle both

of the Jewish and Christian dispensations, ib. with the evidence of

miracles in general, on which they rest, p. 108; and with the na-

ture of that miracle in particular which was performed upon de-

moniacs, 109. III. The absolute nullity of demons to whom pos-

sessions were ascribed, asserted by all the prophets of God, when

professedly delivering their divine messages to mankind, p. 111.

St. Paul's reasoning on this subject in his first Epistle to the Co-

rinthians, examined at large, and that declaration in particular,

"We know that an idol is nothing in the world," ch. viii. 4, p. 114.

1. By an idol, he here means a Heathen demon or deity, ib. 2. The

demons of the Heathens here spoken of were not devils, p. 117, but

deified human spirits, as is shown from the ordinary acceptation

of demons amongst the Greeks, p. 119; from the constant use of

the word in the New Testament, p. 122, (particularly in Acts xvii.

p. 123. 1 Tim. iv. 1, 124. James ii. 19, ib. Rev. ix. 20, ch. xvi.

14, ch. xviii. 2, p. 129:) from the occasion on which it is used in the

place in question, p. 130, and from the Septuagint, p. 132.

These Heathen demons were nothing in the world, p. 133. 4. As

mere nullities they were esteemed by St. Paul himself, as well as by

other

« Poprzednia Dalej »

Książki