Question re Significance of Casting Out Demons
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:08 pm
I'm beginning to work through the recently added series of lectures on the Narrow Path web site about discipleship, and the first lecture in the series raised a question. Steve is discussing Matthew 7:22, and the significance of false Christians claiming to have cast out demons in Jesus's name. Steve says the following: "Now these guys weren't, apparently, the real deal. But they thought they were. They thought they were disciples -- they thought He would recognize them at the judgment day. But he didn't recognize -- said, 'I don't think I know you. I never knew you. You're not even familiar to me. Get out of here, you don't belong here. Depart from me. You're a worker of iniquity.' A worker of iniquity, casting out demons in Jesus's name? . . . How could that person be a worker of iniquity? Well, apparently it's possible. In fact, if you're familiar with the lives of television evangelists, it's not even unfamiliar. But the fact of the matter is there are people who think the proof of the pudding is that they have signs and wonders, or they cast out demons, or they prophecy, or, in other words, they have phenomena that they are identifying as the proof that they are Christians. But this is the wrong phenomena. . . . Apparently even casting out demons and doing mighty works, it's not always of God."
This point strikes me as eminintly reasonable and seems to be the natural point of the passage. But I was curious how this is to be reconciled with later on in Matthew 12:24-28. This passage is not without ambiguity, and I have never researched it in-depth. But I had always thought that the essence of Jesus's answer to the Pharisees here is to reject the suggestion that Jesus drives out demons as inherently illogical, that the act of driving out demons is something that by its terms cannot be a satanic act, because this would entail a house divided against itself. This reading, though, would be in tension with 7:22 as Steve reasonably reads it. I was curious whether I'm reading the latter passage correctly or if the tension here is only apparent.
Any thoughts would be appreciated!
Best regards,
CThomas
This point strikes me as eminintly reasonable and seems to be the natural point of the passage. But I was curious how this is to be reconciled with later on in Matthew 12:24-28. This passage is not without ambiguity, and I have never researched it in-depth. But I had always thought that the essence of Jesus's answer to the Pharisees here is to reject the suggestion that Jesus drives out demons as inherently illogical, that the act of driving out demons is something that by its terms cannot be a satanic act, because this would entail a house divided against itself. This reading, though, would be in tension with 7:22 as Steve reasonably reads it. I was curious whether I'm reading the latter passage correctly or if the tension here is only apparent.
Any thoughts would be appreciated!
Best regards,
CThomas