Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!bcm!dimacs.rutgers.edu!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: dvnspc1!tom@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com (Tom Albrecht) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Demonised, not demon possessed Message-ID: Date: 6 Apr 91 06:23:04 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Unisys Corporation, Devon Engineering Offices Lines: 24 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article jkk@aiai.ed.ac.uk (John Kingston) writes: > >Some Biblical justification can be found in Luke 4.39 where >Peter's mother-in-law has a fever, and Jesus "rebukes" the fever, which >then leaves her. The word "rebuke" is the same Greek word as is used when >Jesus "rebukes" the demon in the man in the temple (Luke 4.35) and the >demon in the boy with fits (Luke 9.42). It looks as if the fever was caused >by a demon - perhaps scoring 2 on a scale of 0 (no influence) to 10 >(Gadarene demoniac)? Sorry, I think you're reading too much into one Greek word. Jesus rebuked demons as well as His own disciples (Luke 9:55). The same word is used by Jesus when He "rebuked" the wind in Luke 8:24. Are you suggesting that there was a demon in the wind? Doesn't this border on a sort of pantheism? I'm sorry, none of these passage suggest that a child of God can be "possessed" by a demon. I would even argue that the idea of demon-influence is a bit far fetched. After all, "greater is He that is in you, than he that is in the world." We give Satan too much credit, and Christ too little, when it comes to the care and nuture of the Child of God. -- Tom Albrecht