Satan's Defences Are Breached (Matthew 12:22-30)

It is important to understand that in the 1st century eastern world it was not only mental and psychological illness which was ascribed to the influence of demons and devils; all illness was attributed to these malignant powers. Exorcism was very commonly practised; and was in many cases records show was seen to be effective.

There is nothing in that to be surprised at. I personally believe, even today, that sometimes physical illness can issue can still be entirely spiritual in nature, even amongst ourselves today anyone can stress themselves into having a headache, or can convince themselves that they have symptoms of an illness which then can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. When a person under such a belief is confronted with an exorcist in whom they had confidence, often the sickness can be dispelled, and a cure is the result. In such cases if a person who is convinced they was cured, they are cured in deed.

But what about Jesus, what did he do when there were demonic forces at play, how did Jesus deal with them, and was it any different that the practice of the Jewish exorcist his day. Let’s pick up the text in verse 22.

22 Then they brought him a demon-possessed man who was blind and mute, and Jesus healed him, so that he could both talk and see. 23 All the people were astonished and said, “Could this be the Son of David?” 24 But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, “It is only by Beelzebub, the prince of demons, that this fellow drives out demons.” 25 Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand. 26 If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then can his kingdom stand? 27 And if I drive out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your people drive them out? So then, they will be your judges. 28 But if it is by the Spirit of God that I drive out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. 29 “Or again, how can anyone enter a strong man’s house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man? Then he can plunder his house.

(Matthew 12: 22-29)

In this instance Jesus is seen to cure a man who was blind, deaf and dumb and whose infirmity was attributed to demon-possession, and he heals him. The people were amazed. They began to wonder if this Jesus could be the Son of David, the long promised and long expected great Saviour and liberator. Any doubt or questions they had was due to the fact that Jesus was so unlike the picture of the Son of David in which they had been brought up to believe. /Here was no glorious prince with pomp and circumstance; there was no great warrior here rattling his swords and he had no conquering army with him. He did not call upon them to rise up against their Roman oppressors. Here was a simple carpenter from Galilee, who spoke words of gentle wisdom who say things with a compassionate eye, and in hands ministers a gentle healing power. All the time the Scribes and Pharisees were looking critically on. They had already arrived at their own solution to the dilemma Jesus had presented them with.

We heard in yesterday’s episode who they had concluded that Jesus must be destroyed because he was in league with the prince of devils himself. Jesus refutes their allegations again, and in doing so presents three further unanswerable replies to that charge.

(i) If he was casting out devils by the help of the prince of devils, it could only mean that in the demonic kingdom there was at war with itself. If the prince of devils was providing his power to bring about the destruction of his own demonic agents, then there was civil war in the kingdom of Satan, and that his kingdom therefore was doomed. Jesus says, neither a house nor a city can remain strong when it is divided against itself. Dissension within any system of power always spelt the end of that power. Even if the Scribes and Pharisees were right, it would have meant that Satan's days were numbered because there was war within the demonic realm. To put it simply their argument was not logical.

(ii) Jesus says, "If I am casting out devils--and that you cannot or do not, it means that I have invaded the territory of Satan, and that I am actually like a burglar despoiling his house. Clearly no one can get into a “strong man’s” house until the strong man is tied up and rendered helpless. Therefore, the very fact that I have been able successfully to invade Satan's territory must be proof that Satan is bound and powerless to resist my power." By the way, the picture of the binding of the strong man Jesus has taken is another Messianic prophecy from Isaiah (49:24-26). Understanding that perspective leads us to ask another question. When was this “strong man”, the Devil, bound? When was the prince of demons chained and bound in such a way that Jesus could make this breach in his defences? Most Bible experts suggest that this was prophesied in Genesis when the serpents has his head crushed, and happened after he unsuccessfully attempted to tempt Jesus' in the wilderness, and ultimately fulfilled with Jesus death and resurrection from the cross.

When Jesus faced the Tempter in the wilderness and overcame him, with his obedience to the will of father and his use of the Word of God something happened that day. For the first time Satan found someone whom all his tricks and wiles could not seduce, and someone whom his attacks could not conquer. From that time the power of Satan has never been quite the same. He is no longer the all-conquering power of darkness; it was the beginning of his destruction that began in the wilderness when the power of sin was for the first time . The defences were breached; the enemy is not yet fully conquered; but his power can never be the same again. That is what many believe happened to Satan during the failed wilderness temptation  and Jesus can now help others win the victory he himself won that day.

The Truth About Exorcism

Jesus' second argument, to which we now come, was to point out that his accusers’, the Jews themselves practised exorcism. There Jews of Jesus day practiced exorcism and expelled demons and brought about healings. If he was practising exorcism by the power of the prince of devils, then by nature if they were doing the same thing, then surely, that means they must be doing the same. For they were dealing with the same diseases, and they had on occasion had been successful in having the same effect of delivering these poor people successfully. So, what was the difference , well I would like to look at the customs and the methods of the Jewish exorcists, for they were a remarkable contrast to their practice and the method of Jesus uses here.

Josephus, a perfectly reputable historian of that era, says that the power to cast out demons was part of the wisdom of Solomon, that was continued to be practiced among the Jewish people. He describes a case which he himself saw in chapter 2 of the second volume of his series of  book/scrolls called Antiquities. Now I’m going to read a lengthy section from out not just to explain the method that he saw used and likely used right up to the time of Jesus, so we can use it as a comparison to what Jesus is seen to do here.

"God enabled Solomon to learn that skill which expels demons, which is a science useful and health-bringing to men. He composed such incantations also, by which distempers are alleviated. And he left behind him also the manner of using exorcisms, by which they drive away demons so that they never return, and this method of cure is of great force unto this day; for I have seen a certain man of my own country, whose name was Eleazar, releasing people who were demoniacal in the presence of Vespasian, and his sons, and his captains, and the whole multitude of his soldiers. The manner of the cure was this. He put a ring that had a root which was one of those sorts mentioned by Solomon in the nostrils of the demoniac, after which he drew out the demon through his nostrils; and when the man fell down immediately, he adjured the demon to return into him no more, making still mention of Solomon, and reciting the incantations which he composed. And when Eleazar would persuade and demonstrate to the spectators that he had such a power, he set a little way off a cup or basin full of water, and commanded the demon, as he went out of the man, to overturn it, and thereby to let the spectators know that he had left the man; and when this was done, the skill and wisdom of Solomon was shown very manifestly."

(Antiquities Vol 2 Ch 8: 5)

Here was the Jewish method; here was the whole paraphernalia of what almost looks in my mind anyway almost like a magic show. It almost sounds occult like in tone. How different to the peaceful power of what Jesus says and does. Josephus has further information about how the Jewish exorcists worked. A certain root of a plant was regularly used in the exorcisms Josephus talks  about. It came from valley of Macherus and it was called by the same name. Its colour was said to be red like that of flame.  He says It is not easily eaten, and in fact it was not possible to ingest it unless it was diluted with either urine or blood, even then it is potentially fatal. Yet in spite all the risks involved it, was given to sick people in order to drive away those called demons. (Josephus: Wars of the Jews 7. 6. 3.).

What a difference between Jesus' word of power, and this witch-doctoring which the Jewish exorcists were now using. These were the sort of things the Jewish exorcists did, and it seems that many people sought their deliverance from the evils and the sorrows of mental and physical distress by the use of these religious rituals and their incantations. On one hand, I can fully accept that sometimes when approached from a perspective of faith many may have, for a little while at least, in the mercy of God, found some comfort and relief. But in Jesus we see complete healing as coming through just talking to him, i.e.  the Word of God. with its power to bring to men and woman the perfect deliverance which the needed and some had desperately sought, and which, until he came, they had never been able to find.

One of the most interesting things in the whole passage is Jesus' saying,

"If it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the Kingdom of God has come upon you"

( Matthew 12:28 ).

It is significant to note that the sign of the coming of the Kingdom was not at this time full synagogues and great revival meetings, but the defeat of pain and suffering.

Final Verse

"He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters abroad."

(Matthew 12: 30)

The picture of gathering and scattering comes from two backgrounds. It comes from harvesting; he who is not sharing in gathering the harvest is scattering the grain abroad, and is therefore losing it to the wind. It also comes from shepherding; he who is not helping to keep the flock safe by bringing it into the fold is leaving it out exposed to the dangers of the world. In this one piercing sentence Jesus lays down the fact that is impossible to be neutral in your response to these events. In this war against Satan and the demonic realm there are only two sides, for Christ or against Christ, gathering with him or scattering with Satan." 

We may apply this saying to ourselves and to the community of other Christian believers we mix with. If our presence is there amongst them strengthening other people, then our absence will be weakening it. There is no halfway house. In all we choose to do is absent ourselves from choice,  then the refusal to choose sides and give assistance to Gods people is in fact the giving of support to the other side. There are three things which might tempt us to be tempted to sit on the fence and remain neutral.

(i) The desire to avoid conflict.  It is a fact that many people that automatically shrink away from anything which is disturbing or involves conflict.

(ii) There is a spirit of fear. Many people refuse the way of Christ because they are afraid to take the stand upon the issues that Christianity demands we remain unflinching . The basic thing that stops many people is the thought of what other people will say. The voice of our neighbours  or colleagues is louder in our ears than the voice of God.

(iii) There is a desire for security. Most people would rather have security than adventure, and the older they grow the more that appears to be the case. A challenge will always involves adventure; Christ comes to us with a challenge, and often we would rather have the comfort of inactivity and security. Selfish inaction is often chosen rather than the adventure of action for Christ.

The saying of Jesus, "He who is not with me is against me" presents us with a problem, for both Mark and Luke have a saying which appears to say the very reverse, "He that is not against us is for us" (Mark 9:40 ; Luke 9:50). But this verse is not so contradictory as is first seems. It is to be noted that Jesus spoke this other verse when his disciples came and told him that they had sought to stop a man from casting out devils in his name, because he was not one of their company. So, his advice to them is that "He that is not with me is against me," is a test that we ought to apply to ourselves. Am I truly on the Lord's side, or am I trying to shuffle through life in a state of cowardly neutrality? But the Matthew verse, "He that is not against us is for us," is a test that we ought to apply to others. 

Am I given to condemning everyone who does not speak with my exact understanding of the word, or worships with the same style of music or share my political ideas? If so, I might be limiting the Kingdom of God to those who think as I do? The saying in this present passage is a test to apply to ourselves; the saying in Mark and Luke is a test to apply to others; for we must always judge ourselves with the highest standard and other people with tolerance.